On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>If that's really true, we could consider having no configuration any
>>time, and just compressing always.  But I'm skeptical that it's
>>actually true.
> I was referring to this for CPU utilization:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1410414381339-5818552.p...@n5.nabble.com
> <http://>
> The above tests were performed on machine with configuration as follows
> Server specifications:
> Processors:Intel® Xeon ® Processor E5-2650 (2 GHz, 8C/16T, 20 MB) * 2 nos
> RAM: 32GB
> Disk : HDD      450GB 10K Hot Plug 2.5-inch SAS HDD * 8 nos
> 1 x 450 GB SAS HDD, 2.5-inch, 6Gb/s, 10,000 rpm

I think that measurement methodology is not very good for assessing
the CPU overhead, because you are only measuring the percentage CPU
utilization, not the absolute amount of CPU utilization.  It's not
clear whether the duration of the tests was the same for all the
configurations you tried - in which case the number of transactions
might have been different - or whether the number of operations was
exactly the same - in which case the runtime might have been
different.  Either way, it could obscure an actual difference in
absolute CPU usage per transaction.  It's unlikely that both the
runtime and the number of transactions were identical for all of your
tests, because that would imply that the patch makes no difference to
performance; if that were true, you wouldn't have bothered writing

What I would suggest is instrument the backend with getrusage() at
startup and shutdown and have it print the difference in user time and
system time.  Then, run tests for a fixed number of transactions and
see how the total CPU usage for the run differs.

Last cycle, Amit Kapila did a bunch of work trying to compress the WAL
footprint for updates, and we found that compression was pretty darn
expensive there in terms of CPU time.  So I am suspicious of the
finding that it is free here.  It's not impossible that there's some
effect which causes us to recoup more CPU time than we spend
compressing in this case that did not apply in that case, but the
projects are awfully similar, so I tend to doubt it.

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to