Subject: Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAA4eK1+8=X9mSNeVeHg_NqMsOR-XKsjuqrYzQf=iCsdh3U4EOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1JY4M+P9VT6VJkuNzO2CYYnc2eT08qRQ6cRYU0eUy2mVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Tgmoa0w1gKTPSq7js4HN-KJjzF3ESBZR2xqLYYOL-+nPZAkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Tgmoa-OdD3CAAd5v8RwxYay-PvGVBwu8pcn4SBrEH_qsyYdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1JwMRcpDMYE72dAByVTM0Z95zaU-1-UiqW5X+-wwopd7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+TgmoZq0VfRmH6qt+tYaAhLQt0amRqkHTowjx0h0hfmT0BFPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1KUVPxBcGTdOuKyvf5p1sQ0HeUbSMbTxtQc=P65OxiZog@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+TgmoYVcNRJs3D2_Nk_ykUfxSVyp+WFqgkwYE+9FPUKVNrwGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1J70Aj6Pvt31LYMD8ptMv7+9WFN0cQLq1LGhCYPFM9njw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Tgmobf5PFpoi3w4zwf5DS0DzwYYpWzHDwwHmQw5Xto1dKyOg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1+dic2HZiqMf4o0O4acUP88R-5-A-9kXU9uz3COOW2WiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+TgmobTdYgh24XNHMoGansYn=zCH5WzAg58jAeNA8WEVUbrbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1L4iV-2qe7AyMVsb+nz7SiX8JvCO+CqhXwaiXgm3CaBUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1KZ1HVOjy39i3FRS9MsbR6GgH8D7cqyoYJxyb2PJt05Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>,
 Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
From: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Message-ID: <56E7032D.6060908@pgmasters.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 14:30:05 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAA4eK1KZ1HVOjy39i3FRS9MsbR6GgH8D7cqyoYJxyb2PJt05Qg@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 2/26/16 11:37 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com
>
>     Here, we can see that there is a gain of ~15% to ~38% at higher
>     client count.
>
>     The attached document (perf_write_clogcontrollock_data_v6.ods)
>     contains data, mainly focussing on single client performance.  The
>     data is for multiple runs on different machines, so I thought it is
>     better to present in form of document rather than dumping everything
>     in e-mail.  Do let me know if there is any confusion in
>     understanding/interpreting the data.
>
> Forgot to mention that all these tests have been done by
> reverting commit-ac1d794.

This patch no longer applies cleanly:

$ git apply ../other/group_update_clog_v6.patch
error: patch failed: src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c:404
error: src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c: patch does not apply
error: patch failed: src/include/storage/proc.h:152
error: src/include/storage/proc.h: patch does not apply

It's not clear to me whether Robert has completed a review of this code 
or it still needs to be reviewed more comprehensively.

Other than a comment that needs to be fixed it seems that all questions 
have been answered by Amit.

Is this "ready for committer" or still in need of further review?

-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net


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