Re: Low Budget Performance, Part 2

On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 14:45, eric soroos wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:19:22 -0500 in message <21018.1038424762@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > eric soroos <eric-psql@soroos.net> writes:
> > > Running pgbench with: scaling factor=1, # transactions = 100, and
> > > #clients =1,2,3,5,10,15
> >
> > The scaling factor has to at least equal the max # of clients you intend
> > to test, else pgbench will spend most of its time fighting update
> > contention (parallel transactions wanting to update the same row).
> >
>
> Ok, with the scaling factor set at 20, the new results are more in line with
> expectations:
>
> For 1-10 clients, IDE gets 25-30 tps, SCSI 40-50  (more with more clients,
> roughly linear).
>
> The CPU was hardly working in these runs (~50% on scsi, ~20% on ide), vs nearly
> 100% on the previous run.

Going back to the OP, you think the CPU load is so high when using SCSI
because of underperforming APPLE drivers?

--
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr.     mailto:ron.l.johnson@cox.net          |
| Jefferson, LA  USA   http://members.cox.net/ron.l.johnson  |
|                                                            |
| "they love our milk and honey, but preach about another    |
|  way of living"                                            |
|    Merle Haggard, "The Fighting Side Of Me"                |
+------------------------------------------------------------+