From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Nick Piggin <piggin(at)cyberone(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: IO scheduler vs PostgreSQL performance measurement |
Date: | 2003-03-24 18:17:12 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0303241114570.23224-100000@css120.ihs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Dear PostgreSQL hackers,
> I am developing a disk IO scheduler for Linux and am aiming to
> have it included in the stable 2.6 release. Due to its design,
> performance regressions do appear, and are often more specific
> to the workload in question than with other schedulers, hence
> one has to go beyond the generic benchmarks.
>
> Databases are one area of difficulty due to multi threaded IO
> and sync writes.
>
> I would appreciate it if you could give me a suggestion
> for a not-too-difficult to set up or interpret PostgreSQL
> benchmark with a reasonable running time (< an hour or so)
> which I can add to my performance regression tests.
>
> It would be good if this were to separately measure most
> common types of PostgreSQL IO work, and from there I would
> leave specific areas to those interested.
>
> I apologise for asking when I could search, however I am
> interested in something up to date and which developers on
> this can agree on.
For quick and dirty testing under high parallel load, you can use pgbench,
which comes with postgres.
cd /usr/local/src/postgresql-7.3.x/contrib/pgbench
make
make install
pgbench -i
pgbench -c 4 -t 100
For more intense testing, look at OSDB the Open Source database benchmark
suite:
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2003-03-24 18:21:48 | Re: Please clarify with regard to Renaming a Sequence |
Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-03-24 18:14:29 | Re: SQL99 ARRAY support proposal |