From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgbench duration option |
Date: | 2008-08-19 00:18:40 |
Message-ID: | 8861.1219105120@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Greg Smith wrote:
>> Last time I tried to quantify the overhead of logging with timestamps on
>> I couldn't even measure its impact, it was lower than the usual pgbench
>> noise.
> There's a hardware deficiency on certain machines -- I think it's old
> ones. I don't know if machines that would currently be used in
> production would contain such a problem.
My understanding is that it's basically "cheap PC hardware" (with clock
interfaces based on old ISA bus specs) that has the issue in a
significant way. I wouldn't expect you to see it on a serious database
server. But lots of people still do development on cheap PC hardware,
which is why I think this is worth worrying about.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-08-19 00:29:42 | Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-08-18 23:40:28 | Re: Extending varlena |