On 07/23/2012 12:37 AM, David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:56:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
BTW, while we are on the subject: hasn't this split completely
broken the statistics about backend-initiated writes?
Yes, it seems to have done just that.
This implies that nobody has done pull-the-plug testing on either
HEAD or 9.2 since the checkpointer split went in (2011-11-01),
because even a modicum of such testing would surely have shown that
we're failing to fsync a significant fraction of our write traffic.
Furthermore, I would say that any performance testing done since
then, if it wasn't looking at purely read-only scenarios, isn't
worth the electrons it's written on. In particular, any performance
gain that anybody might have attributed to the checkpointer splitup
is very probably hogwash.
This is not giving me a warm feeling about our testing practices.
Is there any part of this that the buildfarm, or some other automation
framework, might be able to handle?
I'm not sure how you automate testing a pull-the-plug scenario.
The buildfarm is not at all designed to test performance. That's why we
want a performance farm.
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: