Re: Performance comparison between Pgsql 10.5 and Pgsql 11.2

From: Nicola Contu <nicola(dot)contu(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Ray O'Donnell" <ray(at)rodonnell(dot)ie>, "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Alessandro Aste <Alessandro(dot)aste(at)gtt(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Performance comparison between Pgsql 10.5 and Pgsql 11.2
Date: 2019-03-05 15:22:06
Message-ID: CAMTZZh2TxTDtR5sK6E5P9q5BWQahuq_6SCig1ZSA7XFj01=C5A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Not sure what you are requesting exactly but here is the strace for the
start of the pg_ctl

Il giorno lun 4 mar 2019 alle ore 21:55 Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
ha scritto:

> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:01 AM Nicola Contu <nicola(dot)contu(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > Attached a part of the strace running the pgbench command for pg11
> > Also attached strace_10 for pg10.6.
>
> That looks like strace output from pgbench, and I don't see any
> interesting differences between v10 and v11 (though I'm surprised to
> see it using poll() instead of ppoll(), and opening a new connection
> for every transaction).
>
> How about syscalls on the server side? You could start it with
> something like "strace -f path/to/postgres -D path/to/pgdata" (-f for
> follow children), and perhaps also use -c so that it shows aggregated
> data (up until you ^C it) instead of every syscall?
>
> --
> Thomas Munro
> https://enterprisedb.com
>

Attachment Content-Type Size
strace_start.txt text/plain 8.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Perumal Raj 2019-03-05 16:09:12 Re: Question about pg_upgrade from 9.2 to X.X
Previous Message Boris Sagadin 2019-03-05 12:39:01 Slave server sometimes locks up