- Цитат от David Fetter (da...@fetter.org), на 23.07.2012 в
15:41 - I'm not sure how you automate testing a pull-the-plug
scenario.
I have a dim memory of how the FreeBSD project was alleged to have
done it, namely by rigging a serial port (yes, it was that long ago)
to the
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
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:29:16AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
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
On 07/23/2012 08:41 AM, David Fetter wrote:
The buildfarm is not at all designed to test performance. That's why
we want a performance farm.
Right. Apart from hardware, what are we stalled on?
Software :-)
I am trying to find some cycles to get something going.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent
On 07/23/2012 08:29 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I'm not sure how you automate testing a pull-the-plug scenario.
fire up kvm or qemu instances, then kill 'em.
--
Craig Ringer
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On 07/23/2012 09:04 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 07/23/2012 08:29 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I'm not sure how you automate testing a pull-the-plug scenario.
fire up kvm or qemu instances, then kill 'em.
Yeah, maybe. Knowing just when to kill them might be an interesting
question.
I'm
On 07/23/2012 09:47 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 07/23/2012 09:04 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 07/23/2012 08:29 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I'm not sure how you automate testing a pull-the-plug scenario.
fire up kvm or qemu instances, then kill 'em.
Yeah, maybe. Knowing just when to kill
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:41 AM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:29:16AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I'm not sure how you automate testing a pull-the-plug scenario.
I have a dim memory of how the FreeBSD project was alleged to have
done it, namely by rigging
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?
On 18.07.2012 02:48, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 17 July 2012 23:56, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
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
On 17 July 2012 23:56, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us 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
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.
So I went to fix this in
On 17 July 2012 23:56, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
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
On 07/17/2012 06:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
So I went to fix this in the obvious way (attached), but while testing
it I found that the number of buffers_backend events reported during
a regression test run barely changed; which surprised the heck out of
me, so I dug deeper. The cause turns out to
On 07/18/2012 12:00 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
The second justification for the split was that it seems easier to get
a low power result from, which I believe was the angle Peter Geoghegan
was working when this popped up originally. The checkpointer has to
run sometimes, but only at a 50% duty
Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 07/17/2012 06:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
