I forgot to mention. At Tue, 12 Jul 2016 11:04:17 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote in <20160712.110417.145469826.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > Cooled down then measured performance again. > > I show you the true result briefly for now. > > At Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:07:22 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > <horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote in > <20160711.190722.145849861.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > > Anyway I need some time to cool down.. > > I recalled that I put Makefile.custom that contains > CFLAGS="-O0". Removing that gave me a sainer result.
Different from the previous measurements, the remote side in these measurements is unpatched-O2 postgres, so the differences are made only by the local-side changes. > patched- -O2 > > table 10-average(ms) stddev runtime-diff from unpatched(%) > t0 441.78 0.32 3.4 > pl 201.77 0.32 13.6 > pf0 6619.22 18.99 -19.7 > pf1 1800.72 32.72 -78.0 > --- > unpatched- -O2 > > t0 427.21 0.42 > pl 177.54 0.25 > pf0 8250.42 23.29 > pf1 8206.02 12.91 > > ========== > > 3% slower for local 1*seqscan (2-parallel) > 14% slower for append-4*seqscan (no-prallel) > 19% faster for append-4*foreignscan (all scans on one connection) > 78% faster for append-4*foreignscan (scans have dedicate connection) > > ExecProcNode might be able to be optimized a bit. > ExecAppend seems to need some fix. > > Addition to the aboves, I will try reentrant ExecAsyncWaitForNode > or something. regards, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
