Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO
Date
Msg-id 31495.1386112091@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Responses Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO
Re: Why we are going to have to go DirectIO
List pgsql-hackers
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>> Would certainly be nice.  Realistically, getting good automated
>> performace tests will require paying someone like Greg S., Mark or me
>> for 6 solid months to develop them, since worthwhile open source
>> performance test platforms currently don't exist.  That money has never
>> been available; maybe I should do a kickstarter.

> So in order to get *testing* we need to pay somebody. But to build a great
> database server, we can rely on volunteer efforts or sponsorship from
> companies who are interested in moving the project forward?

And even more to the point, volunteers to reinvent the kernel I/O stack
can be found on every street corner?  And those volunteers won't need any
test scaffolding to be sure that *their* version never has performance
regressions?  (Well, no, they won't, because no such thing will ever be
built.  But we do need better test scaffolding for real problems.)
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Timothy Garnett
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing parallel pg_restore from pipe
Next
From: Stas Kelvich
Date:
Subject: Re: Cube extension kNN support