Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-14 Thread Merlin Moncure
On 8/14/07, ITAGAKI Takahiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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: > > > >

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-14 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Thanks for the testing, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote: > I gathered oprofile logs. There were 4 HOT-related functions, that didn't > appear in the unpatched test. But it is probably not so serious. > - heap_page_prune 1.84% > - PageRepairFragmentation 0.94% > - pg_qsort 0.

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-14 Thread ITAGAKI Takahiro
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 3

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Merlin Moncure
On 8/8/07, Merlin Moncure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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: >

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 20:27 +0100, Gregory Stark wrote: > "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 13:16 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> I ran some CPU intensive pgbench tests on HOT. Results are not > >> surprising, HOT makes practically no difference on the tot

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Merlin Moncure
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

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Gregory Stark
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 13:16 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas 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: >> ... > N

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 13:16 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas 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

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 15:40 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>unpatched HOT > >> autovacuums116 43 > >> autoanalyzes 139 60 > > > >> HOT greatly reduces the number o

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Mark Mielke
Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: HOT greatly reduces the number of vacuums needed. That's good, that's where the gains in throughput in longer I/O bound runs comes from. But surely failing to auto-analyze after a HOT update

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD
> > unpatched HOT > > autovacuums 116 43 > > autoanalyzes139 60 > > > HOT greatly reduces the number of vacuums needed. That's > good, that's > > where the gains in throughput in longer I/O bound runs comes from. > > But surely failing to

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> unpatched HOT >> autovacuums 116 43 >> autoanalyzes 139 60 > >> HOT greatly reduces the number of vacuums needed. That's good, that's >> where the gains in throughput in longer I/O

Re: [HACKERS] HOT pgbench results

2007-08-07 Thread Tom Lane
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > unpatched HOT > autovacuums 116 43 > autoanalyzes 139 60 > HOT greatly reduces the number of vacuums needed. That's good, that's > where the gains in throughput in longer I/O bound runs comes from.