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

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Date: 2005-07-22 20:27:24
Message-ID: 200507221327.24243.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom,

> Um, where are the test runs underlying this spreadsheet? I don't have a
> whole lot of confidence in looking at full-run average TPM numbers to
> discern whether transient dropoffs in TPM are significant or not.

Web in the form of:
http://khack.osdl.org/stp/#test_number#/

Where #test_number# is:

Machine0, no patch:
302904
302905
302906

Machine0, patch:
301901
302902
302903

Machine2, no patch:
302910
302911
302912

Machine2, patch:
301907
302908
302909

BTW, I am currently doing a wal_buffers scalability run.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2005-07-22 20:42:54 Re: Buildfarm failure - pl/tcl on snake
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-07-22 20:23:38 Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC