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

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Benchmarks WAS: Sun Talks about MySQL

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Benchmarks WAS: Sun Talks about MySQL
Date: 2008-04-27 17:54:00
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-performance
(thread crossed over to pgsql-performance, where it belongs, from 


> I think TPC-E will make both of these major improvements much more important.
> I suspect it would be hard to get 8.2 to even pass TPC-E due to the checkpoint
> dropouts.

You'd be surprised, then.  We're still horribly, horribly lock-bound on 
TPC-E; on anything over 4 cores lock resolution chokes us to death.  See 
Jignesh's and Paul's various posts about attempts to fix this.

Without resolving the locking issues, HOT and checkpoint doesn't have 
much effect on TPCE.


In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Viktor RosenfeldDate: 2008-04-27 19:02:19
Subject: Re: Performance of the Materialize operator in a query plan
Previous:From: Greg SmithDate: 2008-04-27 13:01:46
Subject: Re: Best practice to load a huge table from ORACLE to PG

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Andrej Ricnik-BayDate: 2008-04-27 18:39:16
Subject: Re: New Zealanders?
Previous:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2008-04-26 06:21:21
Subject: Re: Sun Talks about MySQL

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group