Dear Sawada-san, > What does each duration mean in these results? Can we interpret the > test case of max_conflict_retention_duration=120s that when 7 clients > and 15 clients are working on the publisher and the subscriber > respectively, the TPS on the subscriber was about one fourth (17835.3 > vs. 4707)?
Firstly, this workload is done to prove that users can tune their workload to keep enabling the update_deleted detections. Let me describe what happened there with the timetable since the test starts. 0-162s: Number of clients on both publisher/subscriber was 15. TPS was 17835.3 on the publisher and 4571.8 on the subscriber. This means that retained dead tuples on the subscriber may reduce the performance to around 1/4 compared with publisher, and the workload on the publisher is too heavy to keep working the update_deleted detection. 163-314s: Number of clients was 7 on publisher, and 15 on subscriber. TPS was 9503.8 on the publisher and 4707 on the subscriber. This means that N=7 on the publisher was still too many thus conflict slot must be invalidated. 315-597s: Number of clients was 3 on publisher, and 15 on subscriber. TPS was 4243.9 on the publisher and 19568.4 on the subscriber. Here the conflict slot could survive during the benchmark because concurrency on the publisher was reduced. Performance could be improved on the subscriber side because dead tuples can be reduced here. Best regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED
