| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Quality and Performance |
| Date: | 2007-11-27 20:41:20 |
| Message-ID: | 1196196080.4246.1141.camel@ebony.site |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 13:32 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> We also need to talk about what would be a good set of tests to run.
I think we should develop a series of performance regression tests that
can be run as an option on the buildfarm. We'd want a separate page for
that with graphs etc, as you suggest.
My vision for that is a set of tests that test very specific aspects of
code, much the same way as the regression tests attempt feature
coverage. Examples would be
- 10000 INSERTs
- 10000 INSERTs using multi-VALUEs clauses
- 100000 rows inserted by COPY
- 100000 rows inserted by CTAS
We would need a way to compare results between releases, so we can see
which aspects have regressed/improved, just as we have with the
buildfarm. That will also be food for release notes, where we can
mention all actions that are >5% faster, or anything we must regrettably
report as being slower.
Sounds like it's waiting on somebody to make the first move, so maybe I
should do that, then let everybody else chip into the framework.
Should we do this as part of core, or as a separate pgfoundry project?
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-11-27 21:00:03 | Re: Quality and Performance |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-11-27 20:37:04 | Re: PG 7.3 is five years old today |