Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: WIP: bufmgr rewrite per recent discussions

From: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)coretech(dot)co(dot)nz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIP: bufmgr rewrite per recent discussions
Date: 2005-02-17 01:05:15
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patches
Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't feel this is quite ready to commit, but here it is if anyone
> would like to try some performance testing.  Using "pgbench -s 10"
> on a single-CPU machine, I find this code a little slower than CVS tip
> at shared_buffers = 1000, but noticeably faster (~10% speedup) at
> 10000 buffers.  So it's not a dead loss for single-CPU anyway.  What
> we need now is some performance measurements on multi-CPU boxes.
> The bgwriter algorithm probably needs more work, maybe some more GUC
> parameters.

Here are some results for a 2xPIII 700Mhz with 2G ram running Freebsd 5.3:

Pgbench:  s=10 c=4 t=1000
Pg:       wal_buffers=128 checkpoint_segments=10

3 runs of each combination were averaged. the figure is the tps 
including connection time (with range in the brackets).

8.1 CVS

shared_buffers=1000   tps=129 (129-131)
shared_buffers=10000  tps=146 (145-148)

8.1 CVS + buf patch

shared_buffers=1000   tps=135 (131-138)
shared_buffers=10000  tps=154 (154-155)



In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-17 01:05:50
Subject: Re: WIP: bufmgr rewrite per recent discussions
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-17 00:50:28
Subject: WIP: buffer manager rewrite (take 2)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group