On 2019-07-21 21:37:28 +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> select.sql:
> \set p 1
> select * from ht where a = :p
> Master:
> $ pgbench -n -f select.sql -T 60 -M prepared postgres
> tps = 10172.035036 (excluding connections establishing)
> tps = 10192.780529 (excluding connections establishing)
> tps = 10331.306003 (excluding connections establishing)
> Patched:
> $ pgbench -n -f select.sql -T 60 -M prepared postgres
> tps = 15080.765549 (excluding connections establishing)
> tps = 14994.404069 (excluding connections establishing)
> tps = 14982.923480 (excluding connections establishing)
> That seems fine, 46% faster.
> v6 is attached.
> I plan to push this in a few days unless someone objects.

It does seem far less objectionable than the other case.  I hate to
throw in one more wrench into a topic finally making progress, but: Have
either of you considered just replacing the dynahash table with a
simplehash style one?  Given the obvious speed sensitivity, and the fact
that for it (in contrast to the shared lock table) no partitioning is
needed, that seems like a good thing to try.  It seems quite possible
that both the iteration and plain manipulations are going to be faster,
due to far less indirections - e.g. the iteration through the array will
just be an array walk with a known stride, far easier for the CPU to


Andres Freund

Reply via email to