[HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] RE: 答复: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

2014-09-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Xiaoyulei wrote: > benchmarSQL has about half reads. So I think it should be effective. > > I don't think BufFreelistLock take much time, it just get a buffer from list. > It should be very fast. You're wrong. That list is usually empty right now; so it does a l

Re: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

2014-09-03 Thread Amit Kapila
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Xiaoyulei wrote: > > > benchmarSQL has about half reads. So I think it should be effective. > > I don't think BufFreelistLock take much time, it just get a buffer from list. It should be very fast. Only incase all the data fits in shared buffers, else it needs to p

Re: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

2014-09-02 Thread Xiaoyulei
0.73% postgres postgres [.] heap_hot_search_buffer >From: Amit Kapila [mailto:amit.kapil...@gmail.com] >Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 10:44 PM >To: Xiaoyulei >Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org >Subject: Re: 答复: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table >pa

Re: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

2014-09-02 Thread Jeff Janes
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Xiaoyulei wrote: > > > We use benchmarksql to start tpcc test in postgresql 9.3.3. > > Before test we set benchmarksql client number about 800. And we increase > the hash partitions from 16 to 1024 , in order to reduce the hash > partition locks competition. > Can

[HACKERS] Re: 答复: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

2014-09-02 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Xiaoyulei wrote: > > I already modified MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS to make sure it is enough. Okay. > > > Total RAM is 130G, and I set shared_buffers 16G, CPU and IO is not full. 50% CPUs are idle. As far as I understand, benchmarkSQL measures an OLTP workload performance

[HACKERS] 答复: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

2014-09-02 Thread Xiaoyulei
: Xiaoyulei 抄送: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org 主题: Re: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Xiaoyulei mailto:xiaoyu...@huawei.com>> wrote: > > > > We use benchmarksql to start tpcc test in postgresql 9.3.3. > > Before

Re: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

2014-09-02 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Xiaoyulei wrote: > > > > We use benchmarksql to start tpcc test in postgresql 9.3.3. > > Before test we set benchmarksql client number about 800. And we increase the hash partitions from 16 to 1024 , in order to reduce the hash partition locks competition. > > We ex

[HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

2014-09-02 Thread Xiaoyulei
We use benchmarksql to start tpcc test in postgresql 9.3.3. Before test we set benchmarksql client number about 800. And we increase the hash partitions from 16 to 1024 , in order to reduce the hash partition locks competition. We expect that after increase the number of partitions, reduces lock