On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 9:24 AM Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 9:02 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 04:04:10PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote: > > > On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 05:57:09PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > >> test-case 1: -T5, WAL ~16 bytes > > >> test-case 1: -t1000, WAL ~16 bytes > > > > > > I wonder if it's worth doing a couple of long-running tests, too. > > > > Yes, 5s or 1000 transactions per client is too small, though it shows > > that things are going in the right direction. > > I'll pick a test case that generates a reasonable amount of WAL 256 > bytes. What do you think of the following? > > test-case 2: -T900, WAL ~256 bytes (for c in 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 > 512 768 1024 2048 4096 - takes 3.5hrs) > test-case 2: -t1000000, WAL ~256 bytes > > If okay, I'll fire the tests.
test-case 2: -T900, WAL ~256 bytes - ran for about 3.5 hours and the more than 3X improvement in TPS is seen - 3.11X @ 512 3.79 @ 768, 3.47 @ 1024, 2.27 @ 2048, 2.77 @ 4096 test-case 2: -T900, WAL ~256 bytes clients HEAD PATCHED 1 1394 1351 2 1551 1445 4 3104 2881 8 5974 5774 16 12154 11319 32 22438 21606 64 43689 40567 128 80726 77993 256 139987 141638 512 60108 187126 768 51188 194406 1024 48766 169353 2048 46617 105961 4096 44163 122697 test-case 2: -t1000000, WAL ~256 bytes - ran for more than 12 hours and the maximum improvement is 1.84X @ 1024 client. test-case 2: -t1000000, WAL ~256 bytes clients HEAD PATCHED 1 1454 1500 2 1657 1612 4 3223 3224 8 6305 6295 16 12447 12260 32 24855 24335 64 45229 44386 128 80752 79518 256 120663 119083 512 149546 159396 768 118298 181732 1024 101829 187492 2048 107506 191378 4096 125130 186728 -- Bharath Rupireddy PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
