Re: Initial 9.2 pgbench write results - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: Initial 9.2 pgbench write results
Date
Msg-id 4F41C975.3010700@2ndQuadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Initial 9.2 pgbench write results  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 02/19/2012 05:37 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Please retest with wal_buffers 128MB, checkpoint_segments 1024

The test parameters I'm using aim to run through several checkpoint 
cycles in 10 minutes of time.  Bumping up against the ugly edges of 
resource bottlenecks is part of the test.  Increasing 
checkpoint_segments like that would lead to time driven checkpoints, 
either 1 or 2 of them during 10 minutes.  I'd have to increase the total 
testing time by at least 5X to get an equal workout of the system.  That 
would be an interesting data point to collect if I had a few weeks to 
focus just on that test.  I think that's more than pgbench testing 
deserves though.

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Initial 9.2 pgbench write results
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: wal_buffers