Re: Benchmarking a large server
От | david@lang.hm |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Benchmarking a large server |
Дата | |
Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.00.1105091745010.25291@asgard.lang.hm обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Benchmarking a large server (David Boreham <david_list@boreham.org>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 9 May 2011, David Boreham wrote: > On 5/9/2011 6:32 PM, Craig James wrote: >> Maybe this is a dumb question, but why do you care? If you have 1TB RAM >> and just a little more actual disk space, it seems like your database will >> always be cached in memory anyway. If you "eliminate the cach effect," >> won't the benchmark actually give you the wrong real-life results? > > The time it takes to populate the cache from a cold start might be important. you may also have other processes that will be contending with the disk buffers for memory (for that matter, postgres may use a significant amount of that memory as it's producing it's results) David Lang > Also, if it were me, I'd be wanting to check for weird performance behavior > at this memory scale. > I've seen cases in the past where the VM subsystem went bananas because the > designers > and testers of its algorithms never considered the physical memory size we > deployed. > > How many times was the kernel tested with this much memory, for example ? > (never??) > > > >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: