Re: 2018-03 Commitfest Summary (Andres #1)
| От | Craig Ringer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: 2018-03 Commitfest Summary (Andres #1) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAMsr+YGrgT4ngULSgyjpGzkffBwMJxCCRpxS2vP67V+7HYHMFg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: 2018-03 Commitfest Summary (Andres #1) (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2 March 2018 at 17:47, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
For instance, I used extensively tps throttling, latencies and timeouts measures when developping and testing the checkpointer sorting & throttling patch.
I have to admit, I've found tps throttling and latency measurement useful when working with logical replication. It's really handy to find a stable, sustainable throughput on master at which a replica can keep up.
PostgreSQL is about more than raw TPS. Users care about latency. Things we change affect latency. New index tricks like batching updates; sync commit changes for standby consistency, etc.
That's not a reason to throw anything and everything into pgbench. But there's value to more than measuring raw tps.
Also, I'm not the one doing the work.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: