Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1htEli-0002pP-Vj for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 17:21:35 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1htElh-0003Xg-RL for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 17:21:33 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1htElh-0003M4-CW for pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 17:21:33 +0000 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1htElf-00011R-5J for pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 17:21:32 +0000 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564DA2012F; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:21:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 01 Aug 2019 13:21:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=anarazel.de; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm2; bh=Cw/wuKM/oKoplYu036aLzFtwVyT Yt2tWsv2O7v96Ujg=; b=euNoY4Unva/gNV+zWQ1daZQZKm+Hqz9zv/UZCBq/EBn LrNEQ4gsGGEvCOCHXrIxmJ9hUIBDSt2DLdQRS9onIWaL6BPLXcyORehYfc9jOhST Scg/5FHyG+EU36rjhf5mEZZRQYowqP0kKBtuJgdJUd7eNa+gzjbpXdG3VfuYVzB2 2+JQroy2xlq5ondOn7QCIJyuVB5GHme/bD4OcK3qu1lZ01BcSlkn/W3O3iONXQmG f8mAqVCo2etIgrpzFcjQTIS5k4eCiubcr/dXyMXSYC53Esvg3LKwwJr4/phDG+1Y R/yATtDQ0zhq0JNirRDHNFnxL5Q++rA9z10RKTljFKw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=Cw/wuK M/oKoplYu036aLzFtwVyTYt2tWsv2O7v96Ujg=; b=ziC6i2lt3C9FGJrdJS/zhw f6lPFTY1OOr4aovUCxD6udA7b8b852OFsgMjn/s7tANYclInk2NBdAsHrc+EPvE+ Sblz5n2ZrwTUFAexjCEsSKpAy0o+pqELWL1x57PyDJMoFGCeYsUQT6mh5WnpSW2e C4rcFmP3yVR469CNsuBEuIJo0EPiKRvwsH5TKfB8AMuQhWt5pk1qh9W4zsGs7eES +GuA24gYbgZXtzCAdQIthcJw7LuMtqXhyHGPMhep+cQ98iJhnsWZqVz3Az8wtvuC g+aB8d5g7E/qot4IwZ3yRst4PWrVoWTUg1TgocCWG6nVRKFgDHYRqGA3ceGd0ThA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddrleejgddutdelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtre dttddtvdenucfhrhhomheptehnughrvghsucfhrhgvuhhnugcuoegrnhgurhgvshesrghn rghrrgiivghlrdguvgeqnecukfhppeeijedrudeitddrvddukedrvdefjeenucfrrghrrg hmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghnughrvghssegrnhgrrhgriigvlhdruggvnecuvehluhhs thgvrhfuihiivgepud X-ME-Proxy: Received: from intern.anarazel.de (c-67-160-218-237.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.160.218.237]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 93296380074; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:21:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 10:21:28 -0700 From: Andres Freund To: Shital A Cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: PSQL performance - TPS Message-ID: <20190801172128.ct3absxmogavdv6v@alap3.anarazel.de> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Hi, On 2019-08-01 08:40:53 +0530, Shital A wrote: > Need help in: > 1. On this env(8core cpu, 16GB) what is the TPS that we can expect? We have > tested with a simple Java code firing insert and commit in a loop on a > simple table with one column. We get 1200 rows per sec. If we increase > threads RPS decrease. > > 2. We have tuned some DB params like shared_buffers, sync_commit off, are > there any other pointers to tune DB params? If you've set synchronous_commit = off, and you still get only 1200 transactions/sec, something else is off. Are you sure you set that? Are your clients in the same datacenter as your database? Otherwise it could be that you're mostly seeing latency effects. Greetings, Andres Freund