Re: FYI , Intel CC and PostgreSQL , benchmark by pgsql

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: jihuang <jihuang(at)iis(dot)sinica(dot)edu(dot)tw>
Cc: pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FYI , Intel CC and PostgreSQL , benchmark by pgsql
Date: 2004-01-15 15:10:01
Message-ID: 22093.1074179401@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

jihuang <jihuang(at)iis(dot)sinica(dot)edu(dot)tw> writes:
> I have a new server and some time to do an interesting simple benchmark.
> Compile PostgreSQL 7.4.1R by gcc3.2 and Intel CC 8.0 , and use pgbench
> to evaluate any difference..

In my experience, a 10% difference in pgbench results is below the noise
level :-(. And when you only run 300 transactions, the results are too
unrepeatable even to be worth posting.

If you had run, say, 10000-transaction tests and averaged the results
over a couple dozen runs, the mean and standard deviation of those
results might be enough data to tell something.

BTW, when you use a number of clients greater than the scaling
factor, what you're measuring is mostly contention artifacts ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-01-15 15:19:30 Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Microsoft releses Services for Unix
Previous Message ohp 2004-01-15 14:49:20 set search_path and pg_dumpall