Mark Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Scale factor 10 produces an accounts table of about 130 Mb. Given that 
> most HW these days has at least 1G of ram, this probably means not much 
> retrieval IO is tested (only checkpoint and wal fsync). Do we want to 
> try 100 or even 200? (or recommend scale factor such that size > ram)?

That gets into a different set of questions, which is what we want the
buildfarm turnaround time to be like.  The faster members today produce
a result within 10-15 minutes of pulling their CVS snaps, and I'd be
seriously unhappy if that changed to an hour or three.  Maybe we need to
divorce compile/regression tests from performance tests?

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to