Re: [PoC] Non-volatile WAL buffer

From: Takashi Menjo <takashi(dot)menjo(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Takashi Menjo <takashi(dot)menjou(dot)vg(at)hco(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Deng, Gang" <gang(dot)deng(at)intel(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PoC] Non-volatile WAL buffer
Date: 2021-02-24 02:03:29
Message-ID: CAOwnP3PfwyFz8sTth-94+SMfo2mW9qndT2ZLUu8sKswn4zNU5w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

I had a performance test in another environment. The steps, setup,
and postgresql.conf of the test are same as the ones sent by me on
Feb 17 [1], except the following items:

# Setup
- Distro: Red Hat Enterprise Linux release 8.2 (Ootpa)
- C compiler: gcc-8.3.1-5.el8.x86_64
- libc: glibc-2.28-101.el8.x86_64
- Linux kernel: kernel-4.18.0-193.el8.x86_64
- PMDK: libpmem-1.6.1-1.el8.x86_64, libpmem-devel-1.6.1-1.el8.x86_64

See the attached figure for the results. In short, the v5 non-volatile
WAL buffer got better performance than the original (non-patched) one.

Regards,

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAOwnP3OFofOsFtmeikQcbMp0YWdJn0kVB4Ka_0tj+Urq7dtAzQ@mail.gmail.com

--
Takashi Menjo <takashi(dot)menjo(at)gmail(dot)com>

Attachment Content-Type Size
image/png 43.7 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com 2021-02-24 02:25:36 RE: libpq debug log
Previous Message kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com 2021-02-24 01:42:57 Refactor ECPGconnect and allow IPv6 connection