On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Tomas Vondra
<tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 10/31/2016 02:51 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> And moreover, this setup (single device for the whole cluster) is very
> common, we can't just neglect it.
> But my main point here really is that the trade-off in those cases may not
> be really all that great, because you get the best performance at 36/72
> clients, and then the tps drops and variability increases. At least not
> right now, before tackling contention on the WAL lock (or whatever lock
> becomes the bottleneck).

Okay, but does wait event results show increase in contention on some
other locks for pgbench-3000-logged-sync-skip-64?  Can you share wait
events for the runs where there is a fluctuation?

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

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

Reply via email to