On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 10:04 PM Andrey Borodin <x4...@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
> I just want to note, that on your screenshot unpatched version runs 400K > tps, while patched runs 280K tps. I see the dates are different and this > effect is not observed in [0]. Probably, you run tests on different > machines. Indeed, patched Postgres I was testing on 2x smaller EC2 instances, it is documented in the GitLab issue. But I added an additional note here: https://gitlab.com/postgres-ai/postgresql-consulting/tests-and-benchmarks/-/issues/21#note_655731979 > While your experiments clearly shows that patch can save DB from > degradation under pathological workload it would be great to ensure patch > does not incur penalty on normal workload. > Makes sense. I'll try to find time to make a direct comparison. I documented all the steps in detail in the GitLab issue, so anyone interested can reproduce it and explore the problem at different angles.
