Message-ID: <b32bed1b-0746-9b20-1472-4bdc9ca66d52@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2023 16:00:01 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.4.2
Subject: Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16
Content-Language: en-US
To: MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
 Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
References: <CAFbpF8N4bVFZ+eyWFj_+fZXZFSayk2kJVtZnouUVKGHudiDrSw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFbpF8N4bVFZ+eyWFj_+fZXZFSayk2kJVtZnouUVKGHudiDrSw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b32bed1b-0746-9b20-1472-4bdc9ca66d52%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hello Mark,

05.05.2023 20:45, MARK CALLAGHAN wrote:
> This is mostly a hobby project for me - my other hobby is removing invasive weeds. I am happy to answer questions and 
> run more tests, but turnaround for answers won't be instant. Getting results from Linux perf for these tests is on my 
> TODO list. For now I am just re-running a subset of these to get more certainty that the regressions are real and not 
> noise.
>

It's a very interesting topic to me, too. I had developed some scripts to
measure and compare postgres`s performance using miscellaneous public
benchmarks (ycsb, tpcds, benchmarksql_tpcc, htapbench, benchbase, gdprbench,
s64da-benchmark, ...). Having compared 15.3 (56e869a09) with master
(58f5edf84) I haven't seen significant regressions except a few minor ones.
First regression observed with a simple pgbench test:
pgbench -i benchdb
pgbench -c 10 -T 300 benchdb
(with default compilation options and fsync = off)

On master I get:
tps = 10349.826645 (without initial connection time)
On 15.3:
tps = 11296.064992 (without initial connection time)

This difference is confirmed by multiple test runs. `git bisect` for this
regression pointed at f193883fc.

Best regards,
Alexander