Re: Add spin_delay() implementation for Arm in s_lock.h

From: "Blake, Geoff" <blakgeof(at)amazon(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Add spin_delay() implementation for Arm in s_lock.h
Date: 2021-12-13 17:27:00
Message-ID: 7E987754-1C43-477B-8FEB-CE894C231B36@amazon.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Tom,

> What did you test exactly?

Tested 3 benchmark configurations on an m6g.16xlarge (Graviton2, 64 cpus, 256GB RAM)
I set the scale factor to consume about 1/3 of 256GB and the other parameters in the next line.
pgbench setup: -F 90 -s 5622 -c 256
Pgbench select-only w/ patch 662804 tps (-0.5%)
w/o patch 666354 tps.
tcpb-like w/ patch 35844 tps (0%)
w/o patch 35835 tps

We also test with Hammerdb when evaluating patches, it shows the patch gets +3%:
Hammerdb (192 Warehouse 256 clients)
w/ patch 1147463 NOPM (+3%)
w/o patch 1112908 NOPM

I've run pgbench more than once and the measured TPS values overlap, even though the means on select-only show a small degradation at the moment I am concluding it is noise. On Hammerdb, the results show a measurable difference.

Thanks,
Geoff

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2021-12-13 17:33:50 Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-12-13 17:23:10 Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions