| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | KONDO Mitsumasa <kondo(dot)mitsumasa(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: gaussian distribution pgbench |
| Date: | 2014-03-18 10:02:46 |
| Message-ID: | 532819C6.60807@vmware.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/18/2014 11:57 AM, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
> I think that this feature will be also useful for survey new buffer-replace
> algorithm and checkpoint strategy, so on.
Sure. No doubt about that.
> If we remove this option, it is really dissapointed..
As long as we get the \setrandom changes in, you can easily do these
tests using a custom script. There's nothing wrong with using a custom
script, it will be just as useful for exploring buffer replacement
algorithms, checkpoints etc. as a built-in option.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2014-03-18 10:39:03 | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe Reply-To: |
| Previous Message | Jürgen Strobel | 2014-03-18 10:02:38 | Re: pg_dump without explicit table locking |