Cooled down then measured performance again. I show you the true result briefly for now.
At Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:07:22 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote in <20160711.190722.145849861.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> > Anyway I need some time to cool down.. I recalled that I put Makefile.custom that contains CFLAGS="-O0". Removing that gave me a sainer result. patched- -O2 table 10-average(ms) stddev runtime-diff from unpatched(%) t0 441.78 0.32 3.4 pl 201.77 0.32 13.6 pf0 6619.22 18.99 -19.7 pf1 1800.72 32.72 -78.0 --- unpatched- -O2 t0 427.21 0.42 pl 177.54 0.25 pf0 8250.42 23.29 pf1 8206.02 12.91 ========== 3% slower for local 1*seqscan (2-parallel) 14% slower for append-4*seqscan (no-prallel) 19% faster for append-4*foreignscan (all scans on one connection) 78% faster for append-4*foreignscan (scans have dedicate connection) ExecProcNode might be able to be optimized a bit. ExecAppend seems to need some fix. Addition to the aboves, I will try reentrant ExecAsyncWaitForNode or something. regards, -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
