From: Guillaume Cottenceau <gc@mnc.ch>
To: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Postgresql TPS Bottleneck
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 16:18:37 +0200
Message-ID: <87zgl64342.fsf@mnc.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VI1PR04MB31338E811E0896D00D85B69B97E19@VI1PR04MB3133.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <VI1PR04MB31338E811E0896D00D85B69B97E19@VI1PR04MB3133.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
<wakandavision 'at' outlook.com> writes:
> Optimally I would like to fully use the CPU and get about 3-4 times
> more TPS (if even possible).
Disclaimer: I'm really not a pg performance expert.
I don't understand your hope to fully use the CPU; if your
scenario is disk-limited, which may very well be the case, then
of course you cannot fully use the CPU. With synchronous commits
and fsync, the system is probably spending time just waiting for
the disks to report the writes completion. Are iostat/vmstat
showing a lot of IO-wait?
Also, if you can live with a few lost transactions in case of
server crash, synchronous_commit=off is very ok and provides a
lot of performance gain.
--
Guillaume Cottenceau
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: gc@mnc.ch, pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Postgresql TPS Bottleneck
In-Reply-To: <87zgl64342.fsf@mnc.ch>
* 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