Re: [HACKERS] PC Week Labs benchmark results

From: Ed Loehr <eloehr(at)austin(dot)rr(dot)com>
To: Timothy Dyck <Timothy_Dyck(at)zd(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PC Week Labs benchmark results
Date: 2000-02-04 16:39:05
Message-ID: 389B00A9.45077CC0@austin.rr.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I was disappointed this benchmark did not include database recovery
and reliability measurements. Benchmarks ought to include the most
important characteristics of an RDBMS, and recovery/reliability is
certainly one of them. People tend to try to "measure up" against
accepted benchmarks; as one currently suffering from apparent
reliability issues, the thought of decreased focus on reliability irks
me.

Cheers,
Ed Loehr

Timothy Dyck wrote:
>
> Hi everybody, I'm done my tests of PostgreSQL and Interbase.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Patrick Welche 2000-02-04 17:11:53 Re: [HACKERS] Another nasty cache problem
Previous Message Don Baccus 2000-02-04 16:26:29 Re: [HACKERS] PC Week Labs benchmark results