Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Date: 2005-07-22 20:23:38
Message-ID: 200507221323.38405.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg,

> For any benchmarking to be meaningful you have to set the checkpoint
> interval to something more realistic. Something like 5 minutes. That way
> when the final checkpoint cycle isn't completely included in the timing
> data you'll at least be missing a statistically insignificant portion of
> the work.

Look at the PDF I sent. This was run with 5, 10, and 30 minutes.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2005-07-22 20:27:24 Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-07-22 20:19:03 Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC