Re: pgbench Comparison of 7.4.7 to 8.0.2 - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Steve Poe
Subject Re: pgbench Comparison of 7.4.7 to 8.0.2
Date
Msg-id 426E7F3A.8000500@sfnet.cc
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgbench Comparison of 7.4.7 to 8.0.2  (Thomas F.O'Connell <tfo@sitening.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Tom,

Honestly, you've got me. It was either comment from Tom Lane or Josh
that the os is caching the results (I may not be using the right terms
here), so I thought it the database is dropped and recreated, I would
see less of a skew (or variation) in the results. Someone which to comment?

Steve Poe


Thomas F.O'Connell wrote:

> Considering the default vacuuming behavior, why would this be?
>
> -tfo
>
> --
> Thomas F. O'Connell
> Co-Founder, Information Architect
> Sitening, LLC
>
> Strategic Open Source: Open Your iâ„¢
>
> http://www.sitening.com/
> 110 30th Avenue North, Suite 6
> Nashville, TN 37203-6320
> 615-260-0005
>
> On Apr 25, 2005, at 12:18 PM, Steve Poe wrote:
>
>> Tom,
>>
>> Just a quick thought: after each run/sample of pgbench, I drop the
>> database and recreate it. When I don't my results become more skewed.
>>
>> Steve Poe
>
>


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Mohan, Ross"
Date:
Subject: Re: Table Partitioning: Will it be supported in Future?
Next
From: Matthew Nuzum
Date:
Subject: speed up query with max() and odd estimates