Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2003-12-16 Thread Manfred Spraul
Bruce Momjian wrote: write 0.000360 write fsync 0.001391 write, close fsync 0.001308 open o_fsync, write0.000924 That's 1 milliseconds vs. 1.3 milliseconds. Neither value is realistic - I guess the hw cache on and the os doesn't issue cache flush

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-26 Thread Manfred Spraul
Tom Lane wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I could certainly do some testing if you want to see how DBT-2 does. Just tell me what to do. ;) Just do some runs that are identical except for the wal_sync_method setting. Note that this should not have any impact on SELECT performance, only

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-26 Thread Manfred Spraul
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Compare file sync methods with one 8k write: (o_dsync unavailable) open o_sync, write 6.270724 write, fdatasync13.275225 write, fsync, 13.359847 Odd. Which filesystem, which kernel? It seems fdatasync is broken and

Re: [PERFORM] futex results with dbt-3

2004-10-19 Thread Manfred Spraul
Neil wrote: . In any case, the futex patch uses the Linux 2.6 futex API to implement PostgreSQL spinlocks. Has anyone tried to replace the whole lwlock implementation with pthread_rwlock? At least for Linux with recent glibcs, pthread_rwlock is implemented with futexes, i.e. we would get a

Re: [PERFORM] futex results with dbt-3

2004-10-25 Thread Manfred Spraul
Tom Lane wrote: Manfred Spraul [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Has anyone tried to replace the whole lwlock implementation with pthread_rwlock? At least for Linux with recent glibcs, pthread_rwlock is implemented with futexes, i.e. we would get a fast lock handling without os specific hacks

Re: [PERFORM] futex results with dbt-3

2004-10-25 Thread Manfred Spraul
Mark Wong wrote: Here are some other details, per Manfred's request: Linux 2.6.8.1 (on a gentoo distro) How complicated are Tom's test scripts? His immediate reply was that I should retest with Fedora, to rule out any gentoo bugs. I have a dual-cpu system with RH FC, I could use it for

Re: [PERFORM] futex results with dbt-3

2004-10-25 Thread Manfred Spraul
Tom Lane wrote: Manfred Spraul [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: The bigger problem here is that the SMP locking bottlenecks we are currently seeing are *hardware* issues (AFAICT anyway). The only way that futexes can offer a performance win is if they have a smarter way

Re: [PERFORM] futex results with dbt-3

2004-10-25 Thread Manfred Spraul
Mark Wong wrote: Pretty, simple. One to load the database, and 1 to query it. I'll attach them. I've tested it on my dual-cpu computer: - it works, both cpus run within the postmaster. It seems something your gentoo setup is broken. - the number of context switch is down slightly, but not

Re: [PERFORM] futex results with dbt-3

2004-10-25 Thread Manfred Spraul
Mark Wong wrote: I've heard that simply linking to the pthreads libraries, regardless of whether you're using them or not creates a significant overhead. Has anyone tried it for kicks? That depends on the OS and the functions that are used. The typical worst case is buffered IO of single