pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive help / color / mirror / Atom feed From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Removed extra memory allocations from create_list_bounds
Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 12:46:08 -0500
Message-ID: <20210523174608.GL3676@telsasoft.com> (raw )
In-Reply-To: <CAMm1aWZvcE87+rzgrdBqdbYNQy6gYHwkVv=t3MMaocU5KfRiEQ@mail.gmail.com >
References: <CAMm1aWYFTqEio3bURzZh47jveiHRwgQTiSDvBORczNEz2duZ1Q@mail.gmail.com >
<20210516170029.GB373@telsasoft.com >
<CALNJ-vS4g3QNmPe8WcgBmJQOzS0K_OAujW_1T0J2JXqpBQoBFw@mail.gmail.com >
<CAMm1aWYr9=qPCTeNzVCEbF=Nr=RLSnt_vdCDTm9VjLS5L5JuOw@mail.gmail.com >
<20210517150310.GG373@telsasoft.com >
<CAMm1aWb0KSOCHexbaeit7gy_p4Uhs18EWyBdPyis4bfw4ids7A@mail.gmail.com >
<CA+TgmoYgF_mPLMkRhHy=6GvYMrhATAB3SY4HNNwR0exY5J3EDQ@mail.gmail.com >
<CAMm1aWZPaxwbk9gibFaEo30dAjMwFJ_meSY3BNDnHq6cOmQ67g@mail.gmail.com >
<20210519191658.GA3496@telsasoft.com >
<CAMm1aWZvcE87+rzgrdBqdbYNQy6gYHwkVv=t3MMaocU5KfRiEQ@mail.gmail.com >
On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 10:40:16PM +0530, Nitin Jadhav wrote:
> I have used the same testing procedure as explained in the previous mail.
> Please find the timing information of the last 10 creation of partitioned
> tables as given below.
> Without patch With 0001 and 0002 With all patch
...
> 18.5464 17.8655 17.5069
For anyone reading non-HTML email, the last line shows the averages of the
previous 10 lines.
>> LIST and RANGE might need to be checked separately..
You checked LIST but not HASH (patches 3-4) or RANGE (patch 4-5), right?
Another test is to show the time/memory used by SELECT. That's far more
important than DDL, but I think the same results would apply here, so I think
it's not needed to test each of LIST/RANGE/HASH, nor to test every combination
of patches. Mostly it's nice to see if the memory use is more visibly
different, or if there's an impressive improvement for this case.
Note that for the MAXRSS test, you must a different postgres backend process
for each of the tests (or else each test would never show a lower number than
the previous test).
Thanks,
--
Justin
view thread (20+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <20210523174608.GL3676@telsasoft.com>
Permalink: ../20210523174608.GL3676@telsasoft.com/
Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/20210523174608.GL3676@telsasoft.com
copy link · copy postgr.es
reply Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pryzby@telsasoft.com, nitinjadhavpostgres@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, zyu@yugabyte.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Removed extra memory allocations from create_list_bounds
In-Reply-To: <20210523174608.GL3676@telsasoft.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox