On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
My vision for that is a set of tests that test very specific aspects of
code, much the same way as the regression tests attempt feature
coverage. Examples would be
- 1 INSERTs
- 1 INSERTs using multi-VALUEs clauses
- 10 rows inserted by COPY
-
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> ... DW operations aren't
>>> really testable without 18 hours to generate data ... but we could test a
>>> lot of things.
>
>> Performance isn't just about humungous DW apps.
>
> Indeed. I think the real tak
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:15:48 -0500
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> ... DW operations aren't
> >> really testable without 18 hours to generate data ... but we could
> >> test
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> ... DW operations aren't
>> really testable without 18 hours to generate data ... but we could test a
>> lot of things.
> Performance isn't just about humungous DW apps.
Indeed. I think the real take-home lesson from these past
Josh Berkus wrote:
Andrew,
It's the tests I think belong in core, not the farm software. Currently
buildfarm performs functionality tests that are also in core.
Jignesh and I were talking about writing a Pole Position-style test which
measures peformance on each of a couple dozen s
Andrew,
> It's the tests I think belong in core, not the farm software. Currently
> buildfarm performs functionality tests that are also in core.
Jignesh and I were talking about writing a Pole Position-style test which
measures peformance on each of a couple dozen specific operations. There
a
On Nov 27, 2007 7:32 PM, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But a performance test machine
> probably needs to be dedicated to just that function. And at least some
> members of the performance test machines would need to be higher end
> machines. The number of people who can afford such r
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Should we do this as part of core, or as a separate pgfoundry project?
Core, please. This is mainline -hackers material.
Huh? The buildfarm isn't in core, why would a performfarm be?
On Nov 27, 2007 11:45 PM, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you start with a set of tests and send it to me I will start work on
> a benchmarking step in the buildfarm client.
Are you sure it shouldn't be a separate client? I don't think neither
the prerequisites nor the results wante
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:00:03 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 12:36 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > The RHEL one as I know it, is the MyYearbook donated one. We are
> > currently unaware of the status of that m
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> Should we do this as part of core, or as a separate pgfoundry project?
> Core, please. This is mainline -hackers material.
Huh? The buildfarm isn't in core, why would a performfarm be?
regards, tom lane
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 13:32 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
We also need to talk about what would be a good set of tests to run.
Sounds like it's waiting on somebody to make the first move, so maybe I
should do that, then let everybody else chip into the framework.
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 15:33 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> I agree
> > that we should *never* have a regression in performance from release
> > to release, which is what I believe has inspired this thread.
>
> Hmm. I have developed several features that have driven perfo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:00:03 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 12:36 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > The RHEL one as I know it, is the MyYearbook donated one. We are
> > currently unaware of the status of that m
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 12:36 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> The RHEL one as I know it, is the MyYearbook donated one. We are
> currently unaware of the status of that machine except to say it is
> currently running Gentoo.
>
> I don't know the status of the Solaris machine except that I think we
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 13:32 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> We also need to talk about what would be a good set of tests to run.
I think we should develop a series of performance regression tests that
can be run as an option on the buildfarm. We'd want a separate page for
that with graphs etc, as
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:32:57 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 13:54 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > However, I think everybody agrees that getting blindsided by
> > unexpected performance dropoffs is a bad thing. We
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 13:54 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> However, I think everybody agrees that getting blindsided by unexpected
> performance dropoffs is a bad thing. We really need to reinstitute
> the sort of daily (or near-daily) performance tracking that Mark Wong
> used to be doing, and extend
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Well I think that we do take performance into account. I agree
>> that we should *never* have a regression in performance from release
>> to release, which is what I believe has inspired this thread.
> Hmm. I have developed se
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:32:49 +
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Maybe we should give each Beta a name, such as "Initial Beta",
> > "Performance Beta", "Usability Beta" as a way of encouraging folk to
Simon Riggs wrote:
We obviously need a performance build farm and I think everyone accepts
that. We just need to do it, so that's a given and is something I hope
to be involved in.
It's on my list ... Had I but world enough and time ...
Performance testing can be bolted onto the exitin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:18:52 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:08 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Agreed. I either initiated or assisted with most of those items; but
>
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 10:08 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Maybe we should give each Beta a name, such as "Initial Beta",
> > "Performance Beta", "Usability Beta" as a way of encouraging folk to
> > focus onto particular aspects of quality at what we con
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:32:49 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe we should give each Beta a name, such as "Initial Beta",
> "Performance Beta", "Usability Beta" as a way of encouraging folk to
> focus onto particular aspects of quali
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 05:32:49PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
> What I would really like to persuade everybody is that performance needs
> specific attention.
[. . .]
> Your thoughts are welcome,
Well, one thing that might help is something of the specifics you mention.
I remember mentioning to
25 matches
Mail list logo
