"Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> What I was referring to by "passing" TPC-E was the criteria for a conformant
>> benchmark run. TPC-C has iirc, only two relevant criteria: "95th percentile
>> response time < 5s" and "average response time < 95th percentile response
>> time". You can pass those even if 1 transaction in 20 takes 10-20s which is
>> more than enough to cover checkpoints and other random sources of inconsistent
> We can do this now. I'm unhappy because we're at about 1/4 of Oracle
> performance, but we certainly pass -- even with 8.2.
We certainly can pass TPC-C. I'm curious what you mean by 1/4 though? On
similar hardware? Or the maximum we can scale to is 1/4 as large as Oracle?
Can you point me to the actual benchmark runs you're referring to?
But I just made an off-hand comment that I doubt 8.2 could pass TPC-E which
has much more stringent requirements. It has requirements like:
the throughput computed over any period of one hour, sliding over the Steady
State by increments of ten minutes, varies from the Reported Throughput by no
more than 2%
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Shane Ambler||Date: 2008-04-28 19:49:59|
|Subject: Re: Very poor performance loading 100M of sql data using
|Previous:||From: PFC||Date: 2008-04-28 18:23:12|
|Subject: Re: Where do a novice do to make it run faster?|
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Joshua D. Drake||Date: 2008-04-28 20:55:27|
|Subject: Re: Benchmarks WAS: Sun Talks about MySQL|
|Previous:||From: Selena Deckelmann||Date: 2008-04-28 16:50:05|
|Subject: Re: LinuxFest Northwest 2008|