Benchmarks, like any other SW, need modernizing and updating from time to time.
Given the multi-core CPU approach to higher performance as the current fad in CPU architecture, we need a benchmark that is appropriate.
If SPEC feels it is appropriate to rev their benchmark suite regularly, we probably should as well.
Ron Peacetree At 12:44 AM 12/14/2006, Tom Lane wrote:
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 18:36 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: >> Mostly, though, pgbench just gives the I/O system a workout. It's not a >> really good general workload. > It also will not utilize all cpus on a many cpu machine. We recently > found that the only way to *really* test with pgbench was to actually > run 4+ copies of pgbench at the same time. The pgbench app itself becomes the bottleneck at high transaction rates. Awhile back I rewrote it to improve its ability to issue commands concurrently, but then desisted from submitting the changes --- if we change the app like that, future numbers would be incomparable to past ones, which sort of defeats the purpose of a benchmark no?
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
