Re: BLCKSZ fun facts

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BLCKSZ fun facts
Date: 2006-11-28 17:08:59
Message-ID: 17186.1164733739@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Aside from that my pgbench testing clearly shows that block sizes larger
> than 2048 become progressively slower. Go figure.

I believe that pgbench only stresses the "small writes" case, so
perhaps this result isn't too surprising. You'd want to look at a mix
of small and bulk updates before drawing any final conclusions.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kenneth Marshall 2006-11-28 17:15:27 Re: BLCKSZ fun facts
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-11-28 17:03:13 Re: Short writes

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kenneth Marshall 2006-11-28 17:15:27 Re: BLCKSZ fun facts
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2006-11-28 16:46:30 BLCKSZ fun facts