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

Re: pgbench Comparison of 7.4.7 to 8.0.2

From: Thomas F(dot)O'Connell <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com>
To: Steve Poe <spoe(at)sfnet(dot)cc>
Cc: PgSQL - Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgbench Comparison of 7.4.7 to 8.0.2
Date: 2005-04-26 06:26:46
Message-ID: b2d2a2f154761904a98d14a73eb2d60e@sitening.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Considering the default vacuuming behavior, why would this be?

-tfo

--
Thomas F. O'Connell
Co-Founder, Information Architect
Sitening, LLC

Strategic Open Source: Open Your i™

http://www.sitening.com/
110 30th Avenue North, Suite 6
Nashville, TN 37203-6320
615-260-0005

On Apr 25, 2005, at 12:18 PM, Steve Poe wrote:

> Tom,
>
> Just a quick thought: after each run/sample of pgbench, I drop the 
> database and recreate it. When I don't my results become more skewed.
>
> Steve Poe

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: apoc9009@yahoo.deDate: 2005-04-26 08:07:33
Subject: Table Partitioning: Will it be supported in Future? (splitting large Tables)
Previous:From: Ron MayerDate: 2005-04-26 05:45:57
Subject: Re: half the query time in an unnecessary(?) sort?

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