Received: from comet.pacifier.com ([199.2.117.155]) by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g0A3RmB98044 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2002 22:27:48 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from dhogaza@pacifier.com) Received: from pacifier.com (dsl-dhogaza.pacifier.net [207.202.226.68]) by comet.pacifier.com (8.11.2/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g0A3R0X15547; Wed, 9 Jan 2002 19:27:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3C3D0A2E.5020501@pacifier.com> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 19:27:42 -0800 From: Don Baccus User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.7) Gecko/20011221 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane CC: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Increasing checkpoint distance helps 7.2 noticeably References: <17608.1010631664@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200201/428 X-Sequence-Number: 17458 Tom Lane wrote: > BTW, has anyone experimented with the OSDB benchmark at > http://osdb.sourceforge.net/ ? I'm wondering if it might give > more useful numbers than pgbench does. Graphs like this are worth saving and adding to the documentation as an aid to understanding various approaches to tuning. Along with the scripts that generate the graphs as an example that folks can use if they have to tune a particular set of queries on a particular set of data. -- Don Baccus Portland, OR http://donb.photo.net, http://birdnotes.net, http://openacs.org