On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 08:50:42 -0800 (PST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In this case, I've only done 1 per each combination. I've found the
>results for this test to be reproduceable.
Pardon?
>>>Linux-2.6.3, LVM2 Stripe Width
>>>BLCKSZ
>>>(going down)16 KB 32 KB 64 KB
On 30 Mar, Manfred Koizar wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 08:50:42 -0800 (PST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>In this case, I've only done 1 per each combination. I've found the
>>results for this test to be reproduceable.
>
> Pardon?
I haven't repeated any runs for each combination, e.g. 1 test with
Hi Manfred,
On 27 Mar, Manfred Koizar wrote:
> Mark,
>
> how often did you run your tests? Are the results reproduceable?
In this case, I've only done 1 per each combination. I've found the
results for this test to be reproduceable.
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:00:01 -0800 (PST), [EMAIL PROTECTE
Mark,
how often did you run your tests? Are the results reproduceable?
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:00:01 -0800 (PST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Linux-2.6.3, LVM2 Stripe Width
>(going across)
>PostgreSQL
>BLCKSZ
>(going down)16 KB 32 KB 64 KB 1
I have some results from DBT-2 testing PostgreSQL with difference block
sizes against different lvm stripe widths on Linux. I've found that
iostat appears to report more erratic numbers as the block size of the
database increases but I'm not able to see any reason for it.
I have pg_xlog on a sepa
