Re: Adding a pgbench run to buildfarm

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Bort, Paul" <pbort(at)tmwsystems(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Adding a pgbench run to buildfarm
Date: 2006-07-24 04:06:30
Message-ID: 790.1153713990@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Bort, Paul" <pbort(at)tmwsystems(dot)com> writes:
> Andrew said I should solicit opinions as to what parameters to use. A
> cursory search through the archives led me to pick a scaling factor of
> 10, 5 users, and 100 transactions.

100 transactions seems barely enough to get through startup transients.
Maybe 1000 would be good.

I think the hard part of this is the reporting process. How do we
track how performance varies over time? It doesn't seem very useful
to compare different buildfarm members, but a longitudinal display of
performance on a single buildfarm machine over time would be cool.
(I'm still missing Mark Wong's daily OSDL performance reports :-()

Actually the $64 question here is whether we trust pgbench as the
standard performance test ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-07-24 04:08:13 Re: why toast tables are not reindexed while clustering?
Previous Message Joe Conway 2006-07-24 03:57:14 Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [HACKERS] 8.2 features?)