On Dec 27, 2007 7:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I concur with Greg Stark's earlier comment that this is all
> overreaction. Let's just fix the misleading comment in the
> documentation and leave it at that.
IMHO, we should also have a special tag for all the binaries
distributed with these options on the official website (RPM or not).
If the RPM packages' version has been tagged .debug or something like
that, it would have been the first thing I checked.
I like Gregory's idea to add a warning in pgbench. I usually run a few
pgbench tests to check there is no obvious problem even if I use
another more complicated benchmark afterwards. I don't know if that's
what other people do, though.
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Merlin Moncure||Date: 2007-12-29 17:22:00|
|Subject: Re: More shared buffers causes lower performances|
|Previous:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2007-12-28 15:05:36|
|Subject: Re: Evaluation of PG performance vs MSDE/MSSQL 2000(not 2005)|