Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> > You should have chosen a better foundation. pg_bench is notorious for
> > producing results that are (a) nonrepeatable and (b) not relevant to
> > a wide variety of situations. All it really tells you about is the
> > efficiency of a large number of updates to a small number of rows.
>
> You might want to try -N option of pgbench. It avoids updates to
> branches and tellers tables.
Cool. Do you feel this will noticeable increase the consistency of the
measurements?
The inconsistency of the internal benchmark results means that
pg_autotune has been using 5-run averages, and using a large tolerance
factor by default. It would be good to improving on that.
:-)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
