Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Solaris Performance (Again)

From: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Solaris Performance (Again)
Date: 2003-12-11 06:09:47
Message-ID: 3FD80A2B.2010601@paradise.net.nz (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
yes - originally I was going to stop at 8 clients, but once the bit was 
between the teeth....If I get another box to myself I will try -s 50 or 
100 and see what that shows up.

cheers

Mark

Neil Conway wrote:

> FYI, the pgbench docs state:
>
>      NOTE: scaling factor should be at least as large as the largest
>      number of clients you intend to test; else you'll mostly be
>      measuring update contention.
>
>-Neil
>
>  
>


In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2003-12-11 06:36:23
Subject: Re: Performance problems with a higher number of clients
Previous:From: Mark KirkwoodDate: 2003-12-11 06:04:15
Subject: Re: Solaris Performance (Again)

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2003-12-11 06:50:08
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL port to pure Java?
Previous:From: Mark KirkwoodDate: 2003-12-11 06:04:15
Subject: Re: Solaris Performance (Again)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group