Benoit, could you run the 1.7.0 test for longer? Say, double the size of BULK_COUNT?
Wendall, that's a useful new data point. Any chance you could compare 1.1.1 with 1.2 so we can line it up with the other results? B. On 29 February 2012 19:40, Wendall Cada <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm using the bash script provided by Robert Newson. > > Linux version 3.2.7-1.fc16.i686.PAE > ([email protected]) (gcc version 4.6.2 20111027 (Red > Hat 4.6.2-1) (GCC) ) > spidermonkey 1.8.5 > i686 > > {"couchdb":"Welcome","version":"1.0.3"} (from stock fedora rpm Release: > 2.fc16) > real 0m35.652s > user 0m0.001s > sys 0m0.006s > > {"couchdb":"Welcome","version":"1.2.0"} git 4cd60f3d1683 > real 0m20.134s > user 0m0.002s > sys 0m0.004s > > Wendall > > > On 02/28/2012 05:17 AM, Jason Smith wrote: >> >> Forgive the clean new thread. Hopefully it will not remain so. >> >> If you can, would you please clone https://github.com/jhs/slow_couchdb >> >> And build whatever Erlangs and CouchDB checkouts you see fit, and run >> the test. For example: >> >> docs=500000 ./bench.sh small_doc.tpl >> >> That should run the test and, God willing, upload the results to a >> couch in the cloud. We should be able to use that information to >> identify who you are, whether you are on SSD, what Erlang and Couch >> build, and how fast it ran. Modulo bugs. > >
