Hi, Mark, really thank you for your feedback.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 7:06 PM Mark Wong <mark...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Yedil, > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 02:50:17PM +0200, Yedil Serzhan wrote: > > Dear hackers, > > > > I'm Yedil. I'm working on the project "Postgres Performance Farm" during > > Gsoc. Pgperffarm is a project like Postgres build farm but focuses on the > > performance of the database. Now it has 2 types of benchmarks, pgbench > and > > tpc-h. The website is online here <http://140.211.168.145/>, and the > repo > > is here <https://github.com/PGPerfFarm/pgperffarm_server>. > > > > I would like you to take a look at our website and, if possible, give > some > > feedback on, for example, what other data should be collected or what > other > > metrics could be used to compare performance. > > Nice work! > > We need to be careful with how results based on the TPC-H specification > are presented. It needs to be changed, but maybe not dramatically. > Something like "Fair use derivation of TPC-H". It needs to be clear > that it's not an official TPC-H result. > > I think I've hinted at it in the #perffarm slack channel, that I think > it would be better if you leveraged one of the already existing TPC-H > derived kits. While I'm partial to dbt-3, because I'm trying to > maintain it and because it sounded like you were starting to do > something similar to that, I think you can save a good amount of effort > from reimplementing another kit from scratch. > > Regards, > Mark > It makes sense to put it as a "fair use derivation of TPC-H". I also used the term "composite score" because of your previous feedback on it. I'll also check out the dbt-3 tool and if the effort is worth it, and if it's necessary, I'll try to switch to it. These are very valuable feedback, thank you again. Best, Yedil
