On 2011-03-21 23:58, Yeb Havinga wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavi...@gmail.com
<mailto:yebhavi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 2011-03-21 18:04, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Yeb
Havinga<yebhavi...@gmail.com <mailto:yebhavi...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
pgbench -i -s 50 test
Two runs of "pgbench -c 10 -M prepared -T 600 test" with 1
sync standby -
server configs etc were mailed upthread.
- performance as of commit
e148443ddd95cd29edf4cc1de6188eb9cee029c5
1158 and 1306 (avg 1232)
- performance as of current git master
1181 and 1280 (avg 1230,5)
- performance as of current git master with
sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement applied
1152 and 1269 (avg 1210,5)
IMO what these tests have shown is that there is no 20%
performance difference between the different versions. To
determine if there are differences, n should be a lot higher, or
perhaps a single one with a very large duration.
pgbench -T 3600:
sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement 1270 tps
current git master 1306 tps
Result of pgbench -T 30000
sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement 1267 tps
current (or few days old) git master 1326 tps
So the patch eats 4,5% from git master's syncrep performance in my
setup. Don't know how to measure it better than that.
--
Yeb Havinga
http://www.mgrid.net/
Mastering Medical Data
