RE: v7.1b4 bad performance

I'm using a test machine that is even less powerful than what you are using.
However, what I'm interested in is the comparison between 7.0x and 7.1x.
Shouldn't the 7.1b4 database be faster? Have you (or anyone else) done this
comparison?
Also, I'm not sure why tps is significantly higher when running the default
(-t 10) vs say -t 1000, but I can live with that...

Thanks.
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Ansley [mailto:Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec-telecom-systems(dot)com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 6:35 AM
To: 'Schmidt, Peter'; 'pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org'
Subject: RE: [ADMIN] v7.1b4 bad performance

With -B 256 -F I'm getting around 70 tps, and I haven't got wonderful
hardware: dual 450Mhz PII, 40GB SCSI drive, 320MB RAM, RH Linux 7.0. I
presume that these benchmarks are not adjusted statistically to compensate
for hardware or anything like that.

pgbench -t 100 -c 5

With

pgbench -t 100 -c 10

I'm getting up to 85 tps, same server settings as above.

MikeA

-----Original Message-----
From: Schmidt, Peter [ mailto:peter(dot)schmidt(at)prismedia(dot)com
<mailto:peter(dot)schmidt(at)prismedia(dot)com> ]
Sent: 12 February 2001 23:53
To: 'pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org'
Subject: [ADMIN] v7.1b4 bad performance

Has anyone run pgbench with the latest beta?
I'm seeing ~50 tps with 7.1b4 versus ~100 tps with v7.02 & 7.03 running
postgres on FreeBSD v4.0. I'm vacuuming before and after each test run and
using -F with postmaster. Originally I thought I had a debug build but what
I'm seeing are debug msgs from vacuum. JDBC interface is much slower...

Thanks.
Peter
pschmidt(at)prismedia(dot)com

**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
Nick West - Global Infrastructure Manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************