Hi. Em qua., 25 de mar. de 2026 às 08:26, lakshmi <[email protected]> escreveu:
> > Hi, >>> >>> Thanks for the suggestion and for the earlier discussion. >>> >> Could you repeat the tests without enable-debug? >> > I repeated the tests using a non-debug (optimized) build of PostgreSQL > (19devel), built without --enable-debug. > > Test setup: > > - > > Debian Linux (x86_64) > - > > gcc 12.2.0 > - > > AMD Ryzen 5 7535U (6 cores / 12 threads) > - > > pgbench scale factor 1 > - > > command: pgbench -p 55432 -d postgres -c 10 -j 4 -T 60 I ran multiple > iterations for both the original and patched versions and considered the > stable runs (excluding those affected by checkpoints). > > Thanks. > > - > > Results: > > Original: > TPS: ~1047 > Latency: ~9.5 ms > > Patched: > TPS: ~1040 > Latency: ~9.6 ms > > From these runs, the results are quite close, and I didn’t observe a > consistent performance improvement with the patch under this workload. The > differences appear to be within normal run-to-run variation. > > I agree. > - > > It may be that this change has limited impact in typical cases where > the number of keys is small. It would be interesting to see how it behaves > with workloads involving larger numbers of keys or different access > patterns. > > I believe it's unnecessary; I think it's been clearly demonstrated that there has been no improvement, so it's not worth it. > - > > Please let me know if you’d like me to try any additional scenarios. > > Thank you for testing. For me, the lesson here is that this is the first time I've seen that unloop doesn't work any better. best regards, Ranier Vilela
