In-Reply-To: <87ek59omex.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
References: <BFA6C187.1425C%llonergan@greenplum.com>
	<4381E077.80009@rentec.com> <87ek59omex.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <8c110ae5a3902fba586f3353b25fc54f@bfccomputing.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: stange@rentec.com, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>,
	Joshua Marsh <icub3d@gmail.com>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org,
	Luke Lonergan <llonergan@greenplum.com>
From: Bill McGonigle <bill@bfccomputing.com>
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:58:18 -0500
To: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>

Would it be worth first agreeing on a common set of criteria to 
measure?  I see many data points going back and forth but not much 
agreement on what's worth measuring and how to measure.

I'm not necessarily trying to herd cats, but it sure would be swell to 
have the several knowledgeable minds here come up with something that 
could uniformly tested on a range of machines, possibly even integrated 
into pg_bench or something.  Disagreements on criteria or methodology 
should be methodically testable.

Then I have dreams of a new pg_autotune that would know about these 
kinds of system-level settings.

I haven't been on this list for long, and only using postgres for a 
handful of years, so forgive it if this has been hashed out before.

-Bill
-----
Bill McGonigle, Owner           Work: 603.448.4440
BFC Computing, LLC              Home: 603.448.1668
bill@bfccomputing.com           Mobile: 603.252.2606
http://www.bfccomputing.com/    Pager: 603.442.1833
Jabber: flowerpt@gmail.com      Text: bill+text@bfccomputing.com
Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/