Re: Improvement of checkpoint IO scheduler for stable transaction responses

From: KONDO Mitsumasa <kondo(dot)mitsumasa(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Improvement of checkpoint IO scheduler for stable transaction responses
Date: 2013-06-27 04:07:22
Message-ID: 51CBBA7A.8060509@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

(2013/06/26 20:15), Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 26.06.2013 11:37, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>>>>> Hmm, so the write patch doesn't do much, but the fsync patch makes
>>>>> the response
>>>>> times somewhat smoother. I'd suggest that we drop the write patch
>>>>> for now, and focus on the fsyncs.
>>
>> Write patch is effective in TPS!
>
> Your test results don't agree with that. You got 3465.96 TPS with the write
> patch, and 3474.62 and 3469.03 without it. The fsync+write combination got
> slightly more TPS than just the fsync patch, but only by about 1%, and then the
> response times were worse.
Please see result of DBT-2 more careful. Average latency in fsync+write was
improoved from only fsync patch. 90% tile and Maximum latency are not all of
result but only part of result in DBT-2. And Average and TPS are all of result.
Generally, when TPS become high in benchmark, checkpointer has to write more
pages. Therefore, 90%tile and Maximum are worse in this case, and it is general
in other benchmark tests.

Best regards,
--
Mitsumasa KONDO
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2013-06-27 04:18:49 Re: pg_filedump 9.3: checksums (and a few other fixes)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-06-27 03:33:53 Re: Add more regression tests for dbcommands