| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |
| Date: | 2004-10-25 01:49:03 |
| Message-ID: | 6097.1098668943@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> writes:
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Considering that the available numbers suggest we could win just a few
>> percent...
> I must confess that I was completely unaware of these "numbers." Where
> do I find them?
The only numbers I've seen that directly bear on the question is
the oprofile results that Josh recently put up for the DBT-3 benchmark,
which showed the kernel copy-to-userspace and copy-from-userspace
subroutines eating a percent or two apiece of the total runtime.
I don't have the URL at hand but it was posted just a few days ago.
(Now that covers all such copies and not only our datafile reads/writes,
but it's probably fair to assume that the datafile I/O is the bulk of it.)
This is, of course, only one benchmark ... but lacking any measurements
in opposition, I'm inclined to believe it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-25 01:50:34 | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |
| Previous Message | Curt Sampson | 2004-10-25 01:32:55 | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-25 01:50:34 | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |
| Previous Message | Curt Sampson | 2004-10-25 01:32:55 | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |