Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Date
Msg-id 200507221327.24243.josh@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom,

> Um, where are the test runs underlying this spreadsheet?  I don't have a
> whole lot of confidence in looking at full-run average TPM numbers to
> discern whether transient dropoffs in TPM are significant or not.

Web in the form of: 
http://khack.osdl.org/stp/#test_number#/

Where #test_number# is:

Machine0, no patch:
302904
302905
302906

Machine0, patch:
301901
302902
302903

Machine2, no patch:
302910
302911
302912

Machine2, patch:
301907
302908
302909

BTW, I am currently doing a wal_buffers scalability run.

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Next
From: "Dave Page"
Date:
Subject: Re: Buildfarm failure - pl/tcl on snake