On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Alexander Korotkov < a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > >> On 2016-03-27 12:38:25 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: >> > On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 1:26 AM, Alexander Korotkov < >> > a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >> > >> > > Thank you very much for testing! >> > > I also got access to 4 x 18 Intel server with 144 threads. I'm going >> to >> > > post results of tests on this server in next Monday. >> > > >> > >> > I've run pgbench tests on this machine: pgbench -s 1000 -c $clients -j >> 100 >> > -M prepared -T 300. >> > See results in the table and chart. >> > >> > clients master v3 v5 >> > 1 11671 12507 12679 >> > 2 24650 26005 25010 >> > 4 49631 48863 49811 >> > 8 96790 96441 99946 >> > 10 121275 119928 124100 >> > 20 243066 243365 246432 >> > 30 359616 342241 357310 >> > 40 431375 415310 441619 >> > 50 489991 489896 500590 >> > 60 538057 636473 554069 >> > 70 588659 714426 738535 >> > 80 405008 923039 902632 >> > 90 295443 1181247 1155918 >> > 100 258695 1323125 1325019 >> > 110 238842 1393767 1410274 >> > 120 226018 1432504 1474982 >> > 130 215102 1465459 1503241 >> > 140 206415 1470454 1505380 >> > 150 197850 1475479 1519908 >> > 160 190935 1420915 1484868 >> > 170 185835 1438965 1453128 >> > 180 182519 1416252 1453098 >> > >> > My conclusions are following: >> > 1) We don't observe any regression in v5 in comparison to master. >> > 2) v5 in most of cases slightly outperforms v3. >> >> What commit did you base these tests on? I guess something recent, after >> 98a64d0bd? >> > > Yes, more recent than 98a64d0bd. It was based on 676265eb7b. > > >> > I'm going to do some code cleanup of v5 in Monday >> >> Ok, I'll try to do a review and possibly commit after that. >> > > Sounds good. > There is next revision of patch. It contains mostly cosmetic changes. Comment are adjusted to reflect changes of behaviour. I also changed atomic AND/OR for local buffers to read/write pair which would be cheaper I suppose. However, I don't insist on it, and it could be reverted. The patch is ready for your review. It's especially interesting what do you think about the way I abstracted exponential back off of spinlock. ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
pinunpin-cas-6.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
