Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16
Alexander Law <exclusion@gmail.com>
From: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
To: MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2023-05-08T13:00:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hello Mark, 05.05.2023 20:45, MARK CALLAGHAN wrote: > This is mostly a hobby project for me - my other hobby is removing invasive weeds. I am happy to answer questions and > run more tests, but turnaround for answers won't be instant. Getting results from Linux perf for these tests is on my > TODO list. For now I am just re-running a subset of these to get more certainty that the regressions are real and not > noise. > It's a very interesting topic to me, too. I had developed some scripts to measure and compare postgres`s performance using miscellaneous public benchmarks (ycsb, tpcds, benchmarksql_tpcc, htapbench, benchbase, gdprbench, s64da-benchmark, ...). Having compared 15.3 (56e869a09) with master (58f5edf84) I haven't seen significant regressions except a few minor ones. First regression observed with a simple pgbench test: pgbench -i benchdb pgbench -c 10 -T 300 benchdb (with default compilation options and fsync = off) On master I get: tps = 10349.826645 (without initial connection time) On 15.3: tps = 11296.064992 (without initial connection time) This difference is confirmed by multiple test runs. `git bisect` for this regression pointed at f193883fc. Best regards, Alexander
Commits
-
Add back SQLValueFunction for SQL keywords
- d8c3106bb60e 16.0 landed
-
Add missing TAP test name
- 1ab763fc22ad 16.0 cited
-
Have the planner consider Incremental Sort for DISTINCT
- 3c6fc58209f2 16.0 cited