Re: New features for pgbench

From: NikhilS <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: New features for pgbench
Date: 2007-02-13 06:27:27
Message-ID: d3c4af540702122227p75134511j5365aa91931de0a2@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Hi,

>
> Right now when you run pgbench, the results vary considerably from run to
> run even if you completely rebuild the database every time. I've found
> that a lot of that variation comes from two things:
>

The main purpose of pgbench runs is an "apples to apples" comparison of 2
source bases. One pristine Postgresql source base and another base being the
same source patched with supposed enhancements.

As long as we use the same postgresql.conf, same hardware environment and
exactly same parameter pgbench runs, the difference in the TPS values
observed between the 2 sources should be a good enough indicator as to the
viability of the new code, dont you think?

E.g. autovacuum will trigger on certain tables only if the threshold is over
the limit. So that gets tied in to the update rate. The "shared_buffers"
will become a bottleneck only if the code and the run is I/O intensive
enough etc.

IMHO, as long as the same environment holds true for both the source base
runs, we should not see unexplained variations as per the reasons you have
mentioned in the observed TPS values.

Regards,
Nikhils

--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-02-13 06:45:59 Re: New features for pgbench
Previous Message Greg Smith 2007-02-13 06:08:04 Re: New features for pgbench