Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29FC32E2D92 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:11:46 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 95938-06 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:11:34 -0400 (AST) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.170]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FC072E0058 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:11:38 -0400 (AST) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j3so239405ugf.49 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:11:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:sender; bh=UIi+UD3mNudFpoHKaD+tOal+Fsis9QZMzjWXnyqHdaw=; b=qW5VntCclvCfYscn7XyX9zx8/iLO4gLlZvTUsINW3fBsFagCiZ9OmhZcW/odYu2u5SPDGqsYiMQi4vK+2b353CrwpvOxN5aiso8WTipkIFDveEWkjb3TGdwcyy5SrKeQRbVD8R0ogD/TTmIzjmXn0h58YdkCzU2w7PCBPsdrjKQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:sender; b=sTue6wLWoID8D0Nhk9t+hCAG/ucdQ3Km2fTQnqLVNd8gKQMC6nxgjQ5cqxVEMPtY5BnUfhuJCh5Kg/o+DVPRJoq8dWFrK/5L6HtuplxXiBj7Oyu9jYM7xGP41ZYh4cJpCBrWjANN8uHomWhtrcB3D92JDwMOEI3K4SByb9P3bkQ= Received: by 10.67.30.6 with SMTP id h6mr905839ugj.6.1197375095910; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:11:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?172.24.32.184? ( [62.232.55.118]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m1sm9927522uge.2007.12.11.04.11.31 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:11:33 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <475E7E71.1070701@enterprisedb.com> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:11:29 +0000 From: Heikki Linnakangas User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.14pre (X11/20071020) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Manolo _ CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Benchmarking PG References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200712/128 X-Sequence-Number: 27944 Manolo _ wrote: > I'd like to benchmark PG. I'd like to compare sorting performances (time spent, #of disk accesses, # of run produced etc) of the present Replacement Selection (external sorting) algorithm and of a refinement I'm going to implement. > > I'm new on PG, I just had the idea of how to possibly get better that algorithm and choosed to test it on PG since it's an open-source DBMS. > > I've been searching the web for a benchmark. I suppose TPC-H and Wisconsin could fit, but had problems when trying to use them. > Any suggestion on a "good benchmark"? > Any tutorial on how to use them? If you want to compare sorting performance in particular, running a big query that needs a big sort will be much more useful than a generic DBMS benchmark like TPC-H. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com