Re: Adding a pgbench run to buildfarm
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Adding a pgbench run to buildfarm |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 44C4BF4D.8000600@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Adding a pgbench run to buildfarm (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz> writes: > >> Scale factor 10 produces an accounts table of about 130 Mb. Given that >> most HW these days has at least 1G of ram, this probably means not much >> retrieval IO is tested (only checkpoint and wal fsync). Do we want to >> try 100 or even 200? (or recommend scale factor such that size > ram)? >> > > That gets into a different set of questions, which is what we want the > buildfarm turnaround time to be like. The faster members today produce > a result within 10-15 minutes of pulling their CVS snaps, and I'd be > seriously unhappy if that changed to an hour or three. Maybe we need to > divorce compile/regression tests from performance tests? > > > We could have the system report build/regression results before going on to do performance testing. I don't want to divorce them altogether if I can help it, as it will make cleanup a lot messier. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: