| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: usleep feature for pgbench |
| Date: | 2007-07-05 21:54:32 |
| Message-ID: | 22479.1183672472@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Did you check that the observed performance for non-usleep-using scripts
>> didn't change? If this extra overhead causes a reduction in reported
>> TPS rates it would make it hard to compare older and newer tests.
> I keep wondering, why is that important? If you want to compare results
> of different PG versions, surely you can run the tests with the newest
> version of pgbench?
It's more about not having to repeat old test cases every time you want
to have numbers comparable to your latest case.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2007-07-05 21:59:46 | Re: Bgwriter strategies |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-07-05 21:49:39 | Re: usleep feature for pgbench |