On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am not sure why we are seeing difference even though running > on same m/c with same configuration.
I have tried many times, but I could not get the numbers you have posted above with HEAD, however now trying with the latest version [1] posted by you, everything seems to be fine at this workload. The data at higher client count is as below: HEAD – commit 494affb Shared_buffers=8GB; Scale Factor = 3000 Client Count/No. Of Runs (tps) 64 128 Run-1 271799 247777 Run-2 274341 245207 Run-3 275019 252258 HEAD – commit 494affb + wait free lw_shared_v2 Shared_buffers=8GB; Scale Factor = 3000 Client Count/No. Of Runs (tps) 64 128 Run-1 286209 274922 Run-2 289101 274495 Run-3 289639 273633 So I am planning to proceed further with the review/test of your latest patch. According to me, below things are left from myside: a. do some basic tpc-b tests with patch b. re-review latest version posted by you I know that you have posted optimization into StrategyGetBuffer() in this thread, however I feel we can evaluate it separately unless you are of opinion that both the patches should go together. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20141010111027.gc6...@alap3.anarazel.de With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
