X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2CF39FB1D5 for ; Tue, 2 May 2006 17:36:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 22344-10 for ; Tue, 2 May 2006 17:36:46 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A4C29FB1D3 for ; Tue, 2 May 2006 17:36:45 -0300 (ADT) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id A86E956437; Tue, 2 May 2006 15:36:44 -0500 (CDT) Received: (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1001); Tue, 2 May 2006 15:36:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 15:36:44 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: Scott Sipe , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Super-smack? Message-ID: <20060502203643.GD97354@pervasive.com> References: <92F10BE1-B193-4EEA-877A-9260B55C2844@mindspring.com> <20060501115449.GC11061@uio.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060501115449.GC11061@uio.no> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE-p4 amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Hashcash: 1:20:060502:cscotts@mindspring.com::XOL23Pr8npSEkTFT:000000000000000 0000000000000000000000003Yo9 X-Hashcash: 1:20:060502:pgsql-performance@postgresql.org::t7J+Z/10dIGCtrNd:00000 0000000000000000000000000zqR X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200605/46 X-Sequence-Number: 18833 On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 01:54:49PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 03:05:54AM -0500, Scott Sipe wrote: > > So, my question is, before I do any further digging, is super-smack > > flawed? > > It's sort of hard to say without looking at the source -- it certainly isn't > a benchmark I've heard of before, and it's also sort of hard to believe a > benchmark whose focus seems to be so thoroughly on one database (MySQL). The > site claims (about PostgreSQL) support that "it looks like it works"; > certainly not a good start for fair benchmarking :-) If you want a more realistic test, try dbt2: http://sourceforge.net/projects/osdldbt -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461