On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 11:17:53PM +0000, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I decided that it would be worth benchmarking this patch.
> Specifically, I tested:
> master, as a basis of comparison
> checksum16_with_wallogged_hint_bits.v10.patch, page_checksums = 'on'
> checksum16_with_wallogged_hint_bits.v10.patch, page_checksums = 'off'
> This test was performed using pgbench-tools. At different client
> counts and scaling factors "1,10,100", performance of an update.sql
> workload was tested.
Looks interesting. Could you get some error bars around the numbers
plotted, and possibly some scaling factors between 10 and 100?
For the former, I'm looking for whether those changes are within
ordinary variation, and in the latter, some better idea of what the
curve looks like.
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Affan Salman||Date: 2012-02-23 00:26:43|
|Subject: Commit a445cb92 not tested without OpenSSL support?|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2012-02-22 23:40:25|
|Subject: Re: pg_upgrade --logfile option documentation|