DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	b=b7D9WYpYifOl3+SDg1tPjQcNLR2cHGYVwAAzX91ektCF5PJI5X/92iMDPD6WYzaLvXrXmSsfbkDptJ3JJkyzSxHcEBTY7d2s9//yt27Yepo+uUPo0uEOiPCUm7UZcb9cgXqnNOwQZB/j22yqMypWsA76dzpTzjhpv2NG7Ehfiuw=
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:12:53 -0800
From: Mark Wong <markwkm@gmail.com>
To: "Jignesh K. Shah" <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Benchmark Data requested
Message-Id: <20080208121253.93f89bb4.markwkm@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <47A792BE.80804@sun.com>
References: <1202150236.4252.521.camel@ebony.site>
	<47A792BE.80804@sun.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:33:34 -0500
"Jignesh K. Shah" <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM> wrote:

> Hi Simon,
> 
> I have some insight into TPC-H on how it works.
> 
> First of all I think it is a violation of TPC rules to publish numbers 
> without auditing them first.  So even if I do the test to show the 
> better performance of PostgreSQL 8.3, I cannot post it here or any 
> public forum without doing going through the "process". (Even though it 
> is partial benchmark as they are just doing the equivalent of the 
> PowerRun of TPCH) Maybe the PR of PostgreSQL team should email 
> info@tpc.org about them and see what they have to say about that comparison.

I think I am qualified enough to say it is not a violation of TPC
fair-use policy if we scope the data as a measure of how PostgreSQL has
changed from 8.1 to 8.3 and refrain from comparing these results to what
any other database is doing.

The point is to measure PostgreSQL's progress not market it, correct?

Regards,
Mark