pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 00:45:15 +0200
Message-ID: <e654de76-0aaa-2873-e105-b6a358e59894@2ndquadrant.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoZ+2OmyUfcNOPsFwsBXJdBcKKPnLaFJ3DJyYLop0u_OLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA4eK1+8=X9mSNeVeHg_NqMsOR-XKsjuqrYzQf=iCsdh3U4EOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1LOk=6omxO15fhhpaG4iOzdzW+9oMr=fh6nCeD37JvB6g@mail.gmail.com>
	<9e877db7-4dc2-88c1-67ae-034ad1a5cafe@2ndquadrant.com>
	<CA+Tgmoan8OxOfxCqiYr6T_Rc9qPFPBxWukBzi1xbGez1UpXx3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<a87bfbfb-6511-b559-bab6-5966b7aabb8e@2ndquadrant.com>
	<CAA4eK1K7Jh1GxQeS+9-ZsadZpz+DfiCXVTjqk+X00aCV6gyP0g@mail.gmail.com>
	<26b69fb2-fa4d-530c-7783-1cb9d952c4e5@2ndquadrant.com>
	<781ac43c-da69-f5c7-a828-7b995691d4cc@2ndquadrant.com>
	<CAA4eK1K4HEsy819bkDxA3GxGBRsBvu9MmuGh3Q_CxUho29FG4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<5da94f12-8141-2f2f-016a-09a8e37bdd30@2ndquadrant.com>
	<CAA4eK1J1sJchNAsbbhKP1DSRubcZLtQuiTjWpxdF0rc9+QoXvg@mail.gmail.com>
	<e78b4f32-f24e-f282-1f46-b66d39d9ca9a@2ndquadrant.com>
	<f9a8572b-5f27-6666-0f44-e845480d989e@2ndquadrant.com>
	<43198bfb-391b-75da-0517-31e56c4d11f4@2ndquadrant.com>
	<d7a7e096-daac-9207-8eae-50f450203312@2ndquadrant.com>
	<CA+TgmoZ+2OmyUfcNOPsFwsBXJdBcKKPnLaFJ3DJyYLop0u_OLQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

On 09/28/2016 05:39 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Tomas Vondra
> <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> So, I got the results from 3.10.101 (only the pgbench data), and it looks
>> like this:
>>
>>  3.10.101               1      8     16     32     64    128    192
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  granular-locking    2582  18492  33416  49583  53759  53572  51295
>>  no-content-lock     2580  18666  33860  49976  54382  54012  51549
>>  group-update        2635  18877  33806  49525  54787  54117  51718
>>  master              2630  18783  33630  49451  54104  53199  50497
>>
>> So 3.10.101 performs even better tnan 3.2.80 (and much better than 4.5.5),
>> and there's no sign any of the patches making a difference.
>
> I'm sure that you mentioned this upthread somewhere, but I can't
> immediately find it.  What scale factor are you testing here?
>

300, the same scale factor as Dilip.

>
> It strikes me that the larger the scale factor, the more
> CLogControlLock contention we expect to have.  We'll pretty much do
> one CLOG access per update, and the more rows there are, the more
> chance there is that the next update hits an "old" row that hasn't
> been updated in a long time.  So a larger scale factor also
> increases the number of active CLOG pages and, presumably therefore,
> the amount of CLOG paging activity.
 >

So, is 300 too little? I don't think so, because Dilip saw some benefit 
from that. Or what scale factor do we think is needed to reproduce the 
benefit? My machine has 256GB of ram, so I can easily go up to 15000 and 
still keep everything in RAM. But is it worth it?

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


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



view thread (248+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <e654de76-0aaa-2873-e105-b6a358e59894@2ndquadrant.com>
Permalink:  ../e654de76-0aaa-2873-e105-b6a358e59894@2ndquadrant.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/e654de76-0aaa-2873-e105-b6a358e59894@2ndquadrant.com

 · 

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: tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, amit.kapila16@gmail.com, dilipbalaut@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de
  Subject: Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
  In-Reply-To: <e654de76-0aaa-2873-e105-b6a358e59894@2ndquadrant.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