From: Peter Geoghegan [mailto:p...@heroku.com] > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > >> [Windows] > >> #clients on off > >> 12 29793 38169 > >> 24 31587 87237 > >> 48 32588 83335 > >> 96 34261 67668 > > > > This ranges from a 28% to a 97% speed improvement on Windows! Those > > are not typos! This is a game-changer for use of Postgres on Windows > > for certain workloads! > > While I don't care all that much about performance on windows, it is a little > sad that it took this long to fix something so simple. Consider this exchange, > as a further example of our lack of concern here: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/30619.1428157...@sss.pgh.pa.us
Probably, the useful Windows Performance Toolkit, which is a counterpart of perf on Linux, was not available before. Maybe we can dig deeper into performance problems with it now. As a similar topic, I wonder whether the following still holds true, after many improvements on shared buffer lock contention. https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/runtime-config-resource.html "The useful range for shared_buffers on Windows systems is generally from 64MB to 512MB." Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
