Re: testing ProcArrayLock patches

Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> It will be a great help if you could spare few minutes to also
> test the patch to take out the frequently accessed PGPROC members
> to a different array. We are seeing good improvements on HPUX IA
> platform and the AMD Opteron and it will be interesting to know
> what happens on the Intel platform too.

For a read only comparison (which was run using the simple
protocol), using identical settings to the previous master run, but
with the PGPROC split patch:

m32 tps = 201738.209348 (including connections establishing)
p32 tps = 201620.966988 (including connections establishing)

m128 tps = 352159.631878 (including connections establishing)
p128 tps = 363998.703900 (including connections establishing)

Clearly a win at 128 clients; not at 32.

For updates:

sm32 tps = 27392.393850 (including connections establishing)
sp32 tps = 27995.784333 (including connections establishing)

sm128 tps = 22261.902571 (including connections establishing)
sp128 tps = 23690.408272 (including connections establishing)

pm32 tps = 34983.352396 (including connections establishing)
pp32 tps = 36076.373389 (including connections establishing)

pm128 tps = 24164.441954 (including connections establishing)
pp128 tps = 27070.824588 (including connections establishing)

That's a pretty decisive win all around.

-Kevin