Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C661337BA8 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 18:14:11 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 11586-08 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 21:13:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from skunk.mtbrook.bozemanpass.com (skunk.mtbrook.bozemanpass.com [69.145.82.195]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51D001337B81 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 18:13:54 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [69.145.82.248] (unknown [69.145.82.248]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by skunk.mtbrook.bozemanpass.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27468558039 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 14:13:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4DC85911.6030602@boreham.org> Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 15:13:53 -0600 From: David Boreham User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PGSQL Performance Subject: Re: Benchmarking a large server References: <4DC85595.5070909@boreham.org> 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-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201105/90 X-Sequence-Number: 43599 On 5/9/2011 3:11 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > The problem with bonnie++ is that the results aren't valid, especially > the read tests. I think it refuses to even run unless you set special > switches. I only care about writes ;) But definitely, be careful with the tools. I tend to prefer small programs written in house myself, and of course simply running your application under a synthesized load.