From: | "Graeme B(dot) Bell" <grb(at)skogoglandskap(dot)no> |
---|---|
To: | Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior <luisjunior(dot)sa(at)gmail(dot)com>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen |
Date: | 2015-02-10 11:27:36 |
Message-ID: | 8D72ADF3-B9B5-4A98-9F05-F7821438593E@skogoglandskap.no |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
I'd suggest you run it on a large ramdisk with fsync turned off on a 32 core computer, see what you get, that will be a good indication of a maximum.
Keep in mind though that 'postgres' with fsync (vs. without) is such a different creature that the comparison isn't meaningful.
Similarly 'postgres' on volatile backing store vs. non-volatile isn't really a meaningful comparison.
There's also a question here about the 't' in TPS. If you have no fsync and volatile storage, are you really doing 'transactions'? Depending on the definition you take, a transaction may have some sense of 'reliability' or atomicity which isn't reflected well in a ramdisk/no-fsync benchmark.
It's probably not ideal to fill a mailing list with numbers that have no meaning attached to them, so why not set up a little web database or Google doc to record max TPS and how it was achieved?
For example, imagine I tell you that the highest I've achieved is 1240000 tps. How does it help you if I say that?
Graeme Bell
On 10 Feb 2015, at 11:48, Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior <luisjunior(dot)sa(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> No problem with this. If anyone want to specify more details.
>
> But I want to know how far postgres can go. No matter OS or other variables.
>
> Gavin, you got more than 12000 TPS?
>
> 2015-02-09 19:29 GMT-02:00 Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>:
> On 10/02/15 08:30, Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A survay: with pgbench using TPS-B, what is the maximum TPS you're ever seen?
>
> For me: 12000 TPS.
>
> --
> Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior
> Important to specify:
>
> 1. O/S
> 2. version of PostgreSQL
> 3. PostgreSQL configuration
> 4. hardware configuration
> 5. anything else that might affect performance
>
> I suspect that Linux will out perform Microsoft on the same hardware, and optimum configuration for both O/S's...
>
>
> Cheers,
> Gavin
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>
>
>
> --
> Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Михаил | 2015-02-10 12:21:10 | getting client_addr not as a superuser |
Previous Message | Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior | 2015-02-10 10:48:02 | Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen |