Bruce Momjian wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:

I ran two 24h test runs with DBT-2, one with the patch and one without. To get comparable, predictable results, I turned autovacuum off and run a manual vacuum in a loop on the stock-table alone.

As expected, the steady-state of the stock table is smaller with the patch. But only by ~2%, that's slightly less than I expected.

But what surprises me is that response times went up a with the patch. I don't know why.
Maybe because of increased contention of ProcArrayLock?  (I assume you
are using that, althought I haven't seen the patch)
I am, but I doubt that's it. The response times are dominated by I/O, so any increase in lock contention would hardly show up. And the patch is only adding one GetOldestXmin call every 1000 scanned pages, which is nothing compared to the thousands of GetSnapshot calls the normal transactions are issuing per minute.

The patch must have changed the I/O pattern in some subtle way.

So are you stopping work on the patch?  I assume so.

Yes, at least for now. I can't believe the patch actually hurts performance, but I'm not going to spend time investigating it.

  Heikki Linnakangas

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at


Reply via email to