On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 06:13, Tom Lane wrote: > Mark Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I never vacuum during the test. Is it possible that all the updates > > and inserts would affect this? > > That's bad; first because it possibly *is* hurting performance, and > second because if it isn't, your results could legitimately be attacked > as not representing the long-term-sustainable performance of Postgres. > VACUUM is real, unavoidable overhead and so we have to account for it > honestly.
Agreed. There does seem to be a downward performance trend over the course of the one-hour tests, fairly consistently across the tests I've seen. This is from about ~4200 tpm peak to ~4000 tpm peak an hour later. I suppose that could be the reason for some of the extended transaction times - though I reported a clear peak in the txn freq/response time graph (with delays of ~7s). If txn times were lengthening because of vacuum, I wouldn't expect to see a peak, just a long tail on the distribution (which we do see...) -- Best Regards, Simon Riggs ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend