Re: Admission Control

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Admission Control
Date: 2010-07-09 02:26:23
Message-ID: AANLkTikjXl3YnBVW7mJiZ-kf5hdQewJxAzSsCc0T4gXR@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Mark Kirkwood
<mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> wrote:
> Purely out of interest, since the old repo is still there, I had a quick
> look at measuring the overhead, using 8.4's pgbench to run two custom
> scripts: one consisting of a single 'SELECT 1', the other having 100 'SELECT
> 1' - the latter being probably the worst case scenario. Running 1,2,4,8
> clients and 1000-10000 tramsactions gives an overhead in the 5-8% range [1]
> (i.e transactions/s decrease by this amount with the scheduler turned on
> [2]). While a lot better than 30% (!) it is certainly higher than we'd like.

Isn't the point here to INCREASE throughput?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Takahiro Itagaki 2010-07-09 02:36:13 Re: patch (for 9.1) string functions
Previous Message Mark Kirkwood 2010-07-09 02:21:56 Re: Admission Control