From: | Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> |
Cc: | Samuel Gendler <sgendler(at)ideasculptor(dot)com>, Reza Taheri <rtaheri(at)vmware(dot)com>, Robert Klemme <shortcutter(at)googlemail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: The need for clustered indexes to boost TPC-V performance |
Date: | 2012-07-06 01:04:20 |
Message-ID: | 4FF63994.8040009@ringerc.id.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
On 07/06/2012 08:41 AM, Andy Colson wrote:
> You're running on windows then? Server is 96Gig ram, 8 cores, (dell
> poweredge T610).
> with two powervault MD1120 NAS's?
Thankfully they're running Pg on Linux (RHEL 6) . It seems that tests to
date have been run against 8.4 which is pretty elderly, but hopefully
it'll be brought up to 9.1 or 9.2beta soon.
While the original poster should've given a reasonable amount of
information to start with when asking performance questions - as per the
mailing list guidance and plain common sense - more info /was/ sent
later on /but the lists.postgresql.org mailman ate it /- or held it for
moderation, anyway. The OP can't be blamed when Pg's mailing list
manager eats mesages with attachments! Also, remember that not everyone
uses community mailing lists regularly; it takes a little learning to
get used to keeping track of conversations, to inline reply style, etc.
--
Craig Ringer
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jasen Betts | 2012-07-06 01:35:46 | Re: Suboptimal query plan fixed by replacing OR with UNION |
Previous Message | Reza Taheri | 2012-07-06 01:00:41 | Re: The need for clustered indexes to boost TPC-V performance |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2012-07-06 01:25:07 | Re: Introducing the TPC-V benchmark, and its relationship to PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Reza Taheri | 2012-07-06 01:00:41 | Re: The need for clustered indexes to boost TPC-V performance |