On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2014-10-11 07:26:57 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 7:00 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> > > > And since > > > your general performance numbers are a fair bit lower than what I see > > > with, hopefully, the same code on the same machine... > > > > You have reported numbers at 1000 scale factor and mine were > > at 3000 scale factor, so I think the difference is expected. > > The numbers for 3000 show pretty much the same: > > SCALE 128 160 175 > HEAD 352113 339005 336491 > LW_SHARED 365874 347931 342528 > > Hm. I wonder if you're using pgbench without -M prepared?
No, I use below statement: ./pgbench -c 128 -j 128 -T 300 -S -M prepared postgres > That'd about > explain the difference. Here I think first thing to clarify is why the numbers on HEAD are different? Another thing is that I generally see difference in numbers at 1000 and 3000 scale factor (although I have not run lately), but in your case the numbers are almost same. I will try once more by cleaning every thing(installation, data_dir, etc..) but not today... With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
