| From: | "tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Amit Kapila' <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "andres(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com" <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: [Patch] Optimize dropping of relation buffers using dlist |
| Date: | 2020-10-08 02:45:06 |
| Message-ID: | OSBPR01MB298225226D471B01E3D0F97EFE0B0@OSBPR01MB2982.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
From: Jamison, Kirk/ジャミソン カーク <k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
> With the latest patches attached, and removing the recovery check in
> smgrnblocks, I tested the performance of vacuum.
> (3 trial runs, 3.5 GB db populated with 1000 tables)
>
> Execution Time (seconds)
> | s_b | master | patched | %reg |
> |-------|--------|---------|----------|
> | 128MB | 15.265 | 15.260 | -0.03% |
> | 1GB | 14.808 | 15.009 | 1.34% |
> | 20GB | 24.673 | 11.681 | -111.22% | 100GB | 74.298 | 11.724 |
> | -533.73% |
>
> These are good results and we can see the improvements for large shared
> buffers, For small s_b, the performance is almost the same.
Very nice!
I'll try to review the patch again soon.
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Nancarrow | 2020-10-08 03:12:28 | Re: Parallel copy |
| Previous Message | tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com | 2020-10-08 02:40:10 | RE: POC: postgres_fdw insert batching |