Re: Speed...
От | Svenne Krap |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Speed... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3B34E836.4832.4311A2B@localhost обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Speed... ("Tim Mickol" <tmickol@combimatrix.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
To: tmickol@combimatrix.com Copies to: svenne@krap.dk, pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Speed... Date sent: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 11:56:03 -0400 From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> > "Tim Mickol" <tmickol@combimatrix.com> writes: > > some quick (and I might add disappointing) benchmark results... > > As has been pointed out before, you must use a pgbench scale factor > higher than one if you are interested in making meaningful measurements > for more than one concurrent client. At scale one, there is only one > "branch", so *every* transaction needs to update the same branch > balance, so there's effectively no concurrency. > > regards, tom lane > Hi Tom, I must admit, that I somewhat hoped you and/or Bruce would "jump in" with your knowledge. How high shall the scaling factor be (or in other words, what pgbench-parameters would you prefer for our little tuning session), and what would you think is "target" to tune upto (using pgbench with your parameters) for a box like mine (Duron 750, 512Megs of memory, Normal IDE-disks) ? Others may give their advice too :) TIA Svenne -- svenne@krap.dk http://www.krap.dk ICQ 5434480 PGP-key http://keys.pgp.dk:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xDF484022 PGP @ http://www.pgp.com / http://www.phpi.com
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: