Re: Impact of checkpoint_segments under continual load conditions
От | Christopher Petrilli |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Impact of checkpoint_segments under continual load conditions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 59d991c4050719122213ac3d81@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Impact of checkpoint_segments under continual load conditions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Impact of checkpoint_segments under continual load conditions
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 7/19/05, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Christopher Petrilli <petrilli@gmail.com> writes: > > On 7/19/05, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> How *exactly* are you invoking psql? > > > It is a subprocess of a Python process, driven using a pexpect > > interchange. I send the COPY command, then wait for the '=#' to come > > back. > > Some weird interaction with pexpect maybe? Try adding "-n" (disable > readline) to the psql command switches. Um... WOW! ==> pgsql_benchmark_803_bigbuffers10000_noreadline.txt <== 0 0.0319459438324 0.0263829231262 1 0.0303978919983 0.0263390541077 2 0.0306499004364 0.0273139476776 3 0.0306959152222 0.0270659923553 4 0.0307791233063 0.0278429985046 5 0.0306351184845 0.0278820991516 6 0.0307800769806 0.0335869789124 7 0.0408310890198 0.0370559692383 8 0.0371310710907 0.0344209671021 9 0.0372560024261 0.0334041118622 ==> pgsql_benchmark_803_bigbuffers10000.txt <== 0 0.0352520942688 0.149132013321 1 0.0320160388947 0.146126031876 2 0.0307128429413 0.139330863953 3 0.0306718349457 0.139590978622 4 0.0307030677795 0.140225172043 5 0.0306420326233 0.140012979507 6 0.0307261943817 0.139672994614 7 0.0307750701904 0.140661001205 8 0.0307800769806 0.141661167145 9 0.0306720733643 0.141198158264 First column is iteration, second is "gen time" to generate the load file, and 3rd is "load time". It doesn't stay QUITE that low, but it stays lower... quite a bit. We'll see what happens over time. Chris -- | Christopher Petrilli | petrilli@gmail.com
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: