Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Thinking about this, presumably any write intensive, multi-user 
> > benchmark would seem to be suitable, so would something like OSDL's 
> > DBT-2 actually be better to try?
> 
> I'm certainly not wedded to pgbench, give it a try.
> 
> BTW, I forgot to mention that it would be useful to try different
> wal_sync_methods along with this.  The reason why it seems unlikely
> the patch is useful on Linux is that the sync methods that use O_DIRECT
> probably dominate using the patch anyway.  There may or may not be
> a similar dependence on sync method on other kernels ...

I am thinking the only way to test this would be to do one heavy update
session to generate a lot of WAL traffic, and another session that is
doing a sequential scan on a table that fills most of the cache.  It
isn't an easy test to make, which was why I was thinking we just add the
patch, but the community disagrees.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  SRA OSS, Inc.   http://www.sraoss.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
       match

Reply via email to