From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Gabriela Serventi <gabrielaserventi@hotmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Performance decrease after upgrade to 9.6.1
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 17:35:03 -0500
Message-ID: <10309.1479249303@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DM3PR1001MB105562015F5D5577967E6EA4DCBF0@DM3PR1001MB1055.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DM3PR1001MB105562015F5D5577967E6EA4DCBF0@DM3PR1001MB1055.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
Gabriela Serventi <gabrielaserventi@hotmail.com> writes:
> $ pgbench -l -c 100 -T 30 pgbench
> starting vacuum...end.
> transaction type: <builtin: TPC-B (sort of)>
> scaling factor: 1
> query mode: simple
> number of clients: 100
> number of threads: 1
> duration: 30 s
> number of transactions actually processed: 27428
> latency average = 110.104 ms
> tps = 908.234296 (including connections establishing)
> tps = 908.278187 (excluding connections establishing)
That's not a tremendously exciting benchmark case, for a number of
reasons:
* 100 sessions in a scale-factor-1 database are all going to be fighting
over updating the single row in the pgbench_branches table.
* 100 sessions driven by a single pgbench thread are probably going to be
bottlenecked by that thread, not by the server.
* 100 sessions on a machine with only 2 cores is going to be all about
process-swap contention anyhow.
My first thought about why the difference from 8.4 to 9.6 is that pgbench
has grown a lot more measurement apparatus since then (for example, the
transaction latency numbers, which weren't there at all in 8.4). You
might try testing 9.6 server with 8.4 pgbench and vice versa to tease out
how much of this is actually on pgbench changes not the server. But in
the end, what you're measuring here is mostly contention, and you'd need
to alter the test parameters to make it not so. The "Good Practices"
section at the bottom of the pgbench reference page has some tips about
that.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, gabrielaserventi@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Performance decrease after upgrade to 9.6.1
In-Reply-To: <10309.1479249303@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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