On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
We really need to nail that down. Could you post the scripts (on the
wiki) you use for running the benchmark and making the graph? I'd
like to see
On 01/24/2012 03:53 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
There are two graphs for each branch. The first is a scatter plot of
latency vs. transaction time. I found that graph hard to understand,
though; I couldn't really tell what I was looking at. So I made a
second set of graphs which graph number of
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
We really need to nail that down. Could you post the scripts (on the
wiki) you use for running the benchmark and making the graph? I'd
like to see how much work it would be for me to change it to detect
checkpoints and do
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think we should be working to commit XLogInsert and then Group
Commit,
Robert Haas wrote:
A couple of things stand out at me from these graphs. First, some
of these transactions had really long latency. Second, there are a
remarkable number of seconds all of the test during which no
transactions at all manage to complete, sometimes several seconds
in a row.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think we should be working to commit XLogInsert and then Group
Commit, then come back to the discussion.
I definitely agree that those two have
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think we should be working to commit XLogInsert and then Group
Commit,
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I think we should be working to commit XLogInsert and then Group
Commit, then come back to the discussion.
I definitely agree that those two have way more promise than anything
else on the table. However, now that I
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Early yesterday morning, I was able to use Nate Boley's test machine
do a single 30-minute pgbench run at scale factor 300 using a variety
of trees built with various patches, and with the -l option added to
track
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Early yesterday morning, I was able to use Nate Boley's test machine
do
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Jeff Janes jeff.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Early yesterday morning, I was able to use Nate Boley's test machine
do a single 30-minute pgbench run at scale factor 300 using a variety
of
I actually don't know much about the I/O subsystem, but, no, WAL is
not separated from data. I believe $PGDATA is on a SAN, but I don't
know anything about its characteristics.
The computer is here:
http://www.supermicro.nl/Aplus/system/2U/2042/AS-2042G-6RF.cfm
$PGDATA is on a 5 disk SATA
Early yesterday morning, I was able to use Nate Boley's test machine
do a single 30-minute pgbench run at scale factor 300 using a variety
of trees built with various patches, and with the -l option added to
track latency on a per-transaction basis. All tests were done using
32 clients and
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
do a single 30-minute pgbench run at scale factor 300 using a variety
Nice
A minor but necessary point: Repeated testing of the Group commit
patch when you have synch commit off is clearly pointless, so
publishing
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:23 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
Early yesterday morning, I was able to use Nate Boley's test machine
do a single 30-minute pgbench run at scale factor 300 using a variety
of trees built with various patches, and with the -l option added to
track
15 matches
Mail list logo
