On Tue, May 4, 2010 18:19, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 18:10 +0200, Erik Rijkers wrote:
>> It would be interesting if anyone repeated these simple tests and
>> produced evidence that these non-HS.
>> (Unfortunately, I have at the moment not much time for more testing)
> Would you be able to make those systems available for further testing?
> First, I'd perform the same test with the systems swapped, so we know
> more about the symmetry of the issue. After that, would like to look
> more into internals.
you mean "systems swapped", primary and standby? primary and standby were on the same machine in
these tests (even the same raid).
I can eventually move the standby (the 'slow' side, as it stands) to another, quite similar
machine. Not in the coming days though...
> Is it possible to setup SytemTap and dtrace on these systems?
I did install systemtap last week. dtrace is not installed (I think. I've never used either.)
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2010-05-04 17:00:17|
|Subject: Re: max_standby_delay considered harmful|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2010-05-04 16:19:47|
|Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance|