----- Цитат от Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com), на 25.06.2011 в 00:16 -----
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:31 PM, wrote: >> clients beta2 +fastlock +lazyvzid local socket >> 8 76064 92430 92198 106734 >> 16 64254 90788 90698 105097 >> 32 56629 88189 88269 101202 >> 64 51124 84354 84639 96362 >> 128 45455 79361 79724 90625 >> 256 40370 71904 72737 82434 > > I'm having trouble interpreting this table. > > Column 1: # of clients > Column 2: TPS using 9.1beta2 unpatched > Column 3: TPS using 9.1beta2 + fastlock patch > Column 4: TPS using 9.1beta2 + fastlock patch + vxid patch > Column 5: ??? 9.1beta2 + fastlock patch + vxid patch , pgbench run on unix domain socket, the other tests are using local TCP connection. > At any rate, that is a big improvement on a system with only 8 cores. > I would have thought you would have needed ~16 cores to get that much > speedup. I wonder if the -M prepared makes a difference ... I wasn't > using that option. > Yes, it does make some difference, Using unpatched beta2, 8 clients with simple protocol I get 57059 tps. With all patches and simple protocol I get 60707 tps. So the difference between patched/stock is not so big. I suppose the system gets CPU bound on parsing and planning every submitted request. With -M extended I get even slower results. Luben -- "Perhaps, there is no greater love than that of a revolutionary couple where each of the two lovers is ready to abandon the other at any moment if revolution demands it." Zizek
