Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions
Date: 2016-02-16 10:18:39
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.10.1602161052560.31368@sto
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Hello Robert,

>> Good point. One simple idea here would be to use a custom pgbench
>> script that has no SQL commands and just calculates the values of some
>> parameters to measure the impact without depending on the backend,
>> with a fixed number of transactions.
>
> Sure, we could do that. But whether it materially changes pgbench -S
> results, say, is a lot more important.

Indeed. Several runs on my laptop:

~ 400000-540000 tps with master using:
\set naccounts 100000 * :scale
\setrandom aid 1 :naccounts

~ 430000-530000 tps with full function patch using:
\set naccounts 100000 * :scale
\setrandom aid 1 :naccounts

~ 730000-890000 tps with full function patch using:
\set aid random(1, 100000 * :scale)

The performance is pretty similar on the same script. The real pain is
variable management, avoiding some is a win.

However, as you suggest, the tps impact even with -M prepared -S is
nought, because the internal scripting time in pgbench is much smaller
than the time to do actual connecting and querying.

--
Fabien.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2016-02-16 10:21:30 Re: Identifying a message in emit_log_hook.
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2016-02-16 09:57:33 Re: Identifying a message in emit_log_hook.