On 2016-03-23 12:33:22 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I think it's worthwhile to create a benchmark that does something like > > > BEGIN;SELECT ... FOR UPDATE; SELECT pg_sleep(random_time); > > > INSERT;COMMIT; you'd find that if random is a bit larger (say 20-200ms, > > > completely realistic values for network RTT + application computation), > > > the success rate of group updates shrinks noticeably. > > > > > > > Will do some tests based on above test and share results. > > > > Forgot to mention that the effect of patch is better visible with unlogged > tables, so will do the test with those and request you to use same if you > yourself is also planning to perform some tests.
I'm playing around with SELECT txid_current(); right now - that should be about the most specific load for setting clog bits. Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
