Re: pg_test_fsync performance
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_test_fsync performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20120214025406.GA3935@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_test_fsync performance (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_test_fsync performance
Re: pg_test_fsync performance |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 08:28:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > > Instead of or in addition to a fixed number operations per test, maybe > > we should cut off each test after a certain amount of wall-clock time, > > like 15 seconds. > > +1, I was about to suggest the same thing. Running any of these tests > for a fixed number of iterations will result in drastic degradation of > accuracy as soon as the machine's behavior changes noticeably from what > you were expecting. Run them for a fixed time period instead. Or maybe > do a few, then check elapsed time and estimate a number of iterations to > use, if you're worried about the cost of doing gettimeofday after each > write. Good idea, and it worked out very well. I changed the -o loops parameter to -s seconds which calls alarm() after (default) 2 seconds, and then once the operation completes, computes a duration per operation. The test now runs in 30 seconds and produces similar output to the longer version. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: