X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E1F29DCABC;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:22:38 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 36840-07; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:22:38 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from noel.decibel.org (unknown [67.100.216.10])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1E939DCAA5;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:22:35 -0400 (AST)
Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 481BE3982A; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:22:36 -0600 (CST)
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:22:36 -0600
From: "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>
To: "Jignesh K. Shah" <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
Cc: Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com, Juan Casero <caseroj@comcast.net>,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Ultrasparc T1
Message-ID: <20051220192236.GG28771@pervasive.com>
References: 
 <OF464C8019.B4D88FCD-ON052570DD.0054DA15-052570DD.005C8BB4@ftw.us.ray.com>
	<43A83D77.4030205@sun.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <43A83D77.4030205@sun.com>
X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE amd64
X-Distributed: Join the Effort!  http://www.distributed.net
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.038 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038]
X-Spam-Score: 0.038
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200512/506
X-Sequence-Number: 16327

On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 12:20:55PM -0500, Jignesh K. Shah wrote:
> Is pgbench the workload that you prefer? (It already has issues with 
> pg_xlog so my guess is it probably won't scale much)
> If you have other workload informations let me know.