On 8/7/07, Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I ran some CPU intensive pgbench tests on HOT. Results are not
> surprising, HOT makes practically no difference on the total transaction
> rate, but reduces the need to vacuum:
>
> unpatched HOT
> tps 3680 3790
> WAL written(MB) 5386 4804
> checkpoints 10 9
> autovacuums 116 43
> autoanalyzes 139 60
Here are some more results...all stock except for partial writes, 24
segments (fsync on). hardware is four 15k sas in a raid 10. I am
seeing very good results in other real wold scenarios outside of
pgbench....anyone is interested drop me a line. Note I cut the
transaction runs down to 100k from 1M.
*** HOT ***
[EMAIL PROTECTED] root]$ time pgbench -c 5 -t 100000
starting vacuum...end.
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 10
number of clients: 5
number of transactions per client: 100000
number of transactions actually processed: 500000/500000
tps = 1156.605130 (including connections establishing)
tps = 1156.637464 (excluding connections establishing)
real 7m12.311s
user 0m26.784s
sys 0m25.429s
*** cvs, HOT ***
[EMAIL PROTECTED] pgsql]$ time pgbench -c 5 -t 100000
starting vacuum...end.
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 10
number of clients: 5
number of transactions per client: 100000
number of transactions actually processed: 500000/500000
tps = 630.510918 (including connections establishing)
tps = 630.520485 (excluding connections establishing)
real 13m13.019s
user 0m27.278s
sys 0m26.092s
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
