Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-22 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 01:50:32PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I'm not sure I believe these numbers at all... my experience is that > > getting trustworthy disk I/O numbers is *not* easy. > > These numbers were reproducable on all the platforms I tested. It's not because they are reproducable

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-22 Thread Kurt Roeckx
Here are my results on Linux 2.6.1 using cvs version 1.7. Those times with > 20 seconds, you really hear the disk go crazy. And I have the feeling something must be wrong. Those results are reproducible. Kurt Simple write timing: write0.139558 Compare fsync times

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-22 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 03:34:21PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > Here are my results on Linux 2.6.1 using cvs version 1.7. > > > > Those times with > 20 seconds, you really hear the disk go crazy. > > > > And I have the feeling som

Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] fsync method checking

2004-03-22 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 02:22:10PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > OK, what better test do you suggest? Right now, there has been no > testing of these. I suggest you start by doing atleast preallocating a 16 MB file and do the tests on that, to atleast be somewhat simular to what WAL does. I h