On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 10:37:54AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > Based on those results the patch does not show a noticable impact when IO > timing > tracking is/are enabled.
I have spent a good portion of my day doing benchmarking with your scenarios as much as Nazir's scenarios posted at [1], with arch_sys_counter as clock source (I am not much into these settings) on the host I have used. And well, I am not seeing a difference between the patch and HEAD when enabling the GUC track_io_timing. I do seem to see a difference when disabling the GUC in the order of 1~2% for the patch and HEAD. > FYI, It’s also worth noticing that if hpet is set then it also affect > negatively > even if no timing tracking is set. It means that when track IO timing is/are > enabled the perf regression seen above are not fully related to having then > enabled but also (for a large part) to hpet vs tsc. Oh, interesting. [1]: https://postgr.es/m/can55fz3rb1spp_17r5nmq+tqlda0odb7cxjdsbtw6d4azo1...@mail.gmail.com -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
