Subject: Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAA4eK1+8=X9mSNeVeHg_NqMsOR-XKsjuqrYzQf=iCsdh3U4EOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150903114137.GE27649@awork2.anarazel.de>
 <CAA4eK1LMMGNQ439BUm0LcS3p0sb8S9kc-cUGU_ThNqMwA8_Tug@mail.gmail.com>
 <55FC4C33.1050903@redhat.com>
 <CAA4eK1LKw4zR6Mb5EQWsmRCyhxpeUakRrDyB1Gth6nw4ktw3iw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
From: Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>
Organization: JBoss, by Red Hat
Message-ID: <55FFFE51.1060308@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 08:55:45 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAA4eK1LKw4zR6Mb5EQWsmRCyhxpeUakRrDyB1Gth6nw4ktw3iw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 09/18/2015 11:11 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> I have done various runs on an Intel Xeon 28C/56T w/ 256Gb mem and 2 x
>> RAID10 SSD (data + xlog) with Min(64,).
>>
>>
> The benefit with this patch could be seen at somewhat higher
> client-count as you can see in my initial mail, can you please
> once try with client count > 64?
>

Client count were from 1 to 80.

I did do one run with Min(128,) like you, but didn't see any difference 
in the result compared to Min(64,), so focused instead in the 
sync_commit on/off testing case.

Best regards,
  Jesper


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers