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
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 |