Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fabien COELHO
Subject Re: checkpointer continuous flushing
Date
Msg-id alpine.DEB.2.10.1603221103220.8198@sto
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: checkpointer continuous flushing  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
>> To emphasize potential bad effects without having to build too large a host
>> and involve too many table spaces, I would suggest to reduce significantly
>> the "checkpoint_flush_after" setting while running these tests.
>
> Meh, that completely distorts the test.

Yep, I agree.

The point would be to show whether there is a significant impact, or not, 
with less hardware & cost involved in the test.

Now if you can put 16 disks with 16 table spaces with 16 buffers per 
bucket, that is good, fine with me! I'm just trying to point out that you 
could probably get comparable relative results with 4 disks, 4 tables 
spaces and 4 buffers per bucket, so it is an alternative and less 
expensive testing strategy.

This just shows that I usually work on a tight (negligeable?) budget:-)

-- 
Fabien.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
Next
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench - allow backslash-continuations in custom scripts