Re: Perf Benchmarking and regression.

From: Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Perf Benchmarking and regression.
Date: 2016-05-06 15:51:11
Message-ID: CAD__OuiObzNVTt_hO__P5AEnU4iNqcFWgArXR4TbLKe-UXyukQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Also, do you see read-only workloads to be affected too?
Thanks, I have not tested with above specific commitid which reported
performance issue but
At HEAD commit 72a98a639574d2e25ed94652848555900c81a799
Author: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Date: Tue Apr 26 20:32:51 2016 -0700

READ-Only (prepared) tests (both when data fits to shared buffers or it
exceeds shared buffer=8GB) performance of master has improved over 9.5

*Sessions* *PostgreSQL-9.5 scale 300* *PostgreSQL-9.6 scale 300* *%diff*
*1* 5287.561594 5213.723197 -1.396454598
*8* 84265.389083 84871.305689 0.719057507
*16* 148330.4155 158661.128315 6.9646624936
*24* 207062.803697 219958.12974 6.2277366155
*32* 265145.089888 290190.501443 9.4459269699
*40* 311688.752973 340000.551772 9.0833559212
*48* 327169.9673 372408.073033 13.8270960829
*56* 274426.530496 390629.24948 42.3438356248
*64* 261777.692042 384613.9666 46.9238893505
*72* 210747.55937 376390.162022 78.5976374517
*80* 220192.818648 398128.779329 80.8091570713
*88* 185176.91888 423906.711882 128.9198429512
*96* 161579.719039 421541.656474 160.8877271115
*104* 146935.568434 450672.740567 206.7145316618
*112* 136605.466232 432047.309248 216.2738074582
*120* 127687.175016 455458.086889 256.6983816753
*128* 120413.936453 428127.879242 255.5467845776

*Sessions* *PostgreSQL-9.5 scale 1000* *PostgreSQL-9.6 scale 1000* %diff
*1* 5103.812202 5155.434808 1.01145191
*8* 47741.9041 53117.805096 11.2603405694
*16* 89722.57031 86965.10079 -3.0733287182
*24* 130914.537373 153849.634245 17.5191367836
*32* 197125.725706 212454.474264 7.7761279017
*40* 248489.551052 270304.093767 8.7788571482
*48* 291884.652232 317257.836746 8.6928806705
*56* 304526.216047 359676.785476 18.1102862489
*64* 301440.463174 388324.710185 28.8230206709
*72* 194239.941979 393676.628802 102.6754254511
*80* 144879.527847 383365.678053 164.6099719885
*88* 122894.325326 372905.436117 203.4358463076
*96* 109836.31148 362208.867756 229.7715144249
*104* 103791.981583 352330.402278 239.4582094921
*112* 105189.206682 345722.499429 228.6672752217
*120* 108095.811432 342597.969088 216.939171416
*128* 113242.59492 333821.98763 194.7848270925

Even for READ-WRITE when data fits into shared buffer (scale_factor=300 and
shared_buffers=8GB) performance has improved.
Only case is when data exceeds shared_buffer(scale_factor=1000 and
shared_buffers=8GB) I see some regression.

I will try to run the tests as you have suggested and will report the same.

Thanks and Regards
Mithun C Y
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-05-06 16:10:16 Re: SET ROLE and reserved roles
Previous Message Vladimir Gordiychuk 2016-05-06 15:23:44 Stopping logical replication protocol