| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Solaris Performance (Again) |
| Date: | 2003-12-11 06:09:47 |
| Message-ID: | 3FD80A2B.2010601@paradise.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
yes - originally I was going to stop at 8 clients, but once the bit was
between the teeth....If I get another box to myself I will try -s 50 or
100 and see what that shows up.
cheers
Mark
Neil Conway wrote:
> FYI, the pgbench docs state:
>
> NOTE: scaling factor should be at least as large as the largest
> number of clients you intend to test; else you'll mostly be
> measuring update contention.
>
>-Neil
>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-12-11 06:50:08 | Re: PostgreSQL port to pure Java? |
| Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2003-12-11 06:04:15 | Re: Solaris Performance (Again) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-12-11 06:36:23 | Re: Performance problems with a higher number of clients |
| Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2003-12-11 06:04:15 | Re: Solaris Performance (Again) |