Received: from localhost (maia-4.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 077529FB344 for ; Mon, 28 May 2007 03:39:15 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 81595-05 for ; Mon, 28 May 2007 03:39:09 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from h07.llord.com (unknown [195.140.142.194]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F0EA9FB32D for ; Mon, 28 May 2007 03:39:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: from par69-8-88-161-102-87.fbx.proxad.net ([88.161.102.87] helo=apollo13) by h07.llord.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1HsYsi-0005b7-NN; Mon, 28 May 2007 08:39:04 +0200 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 08:41:51 +0200 To: Chris Subject: Re: Postgres Benchmark Results From: PFC Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=utf-8 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87hcq5l1c7.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> <465A522C.4030701@gmail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <465A522C.4030701@gmail.com> User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.10 (Linux) X-PopBeforeSMTPSenders: junk@peufeu.com, lists@peufeu.com, peufeu@peufeu.com, pfcaillaud@peufeu.com X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - h07.llord.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - postgresql.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - peufeu.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.883 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL=-0.152, BAYES_20=-0.74, RCVD_IN_NJABL_SPAM=2.775 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200705/569 X-Sequence-Number: 24959 On Mon, 28 May 2007 05:53:16 +0200, Chris wrote: > >> I am re-running it with other tuning, notably cost-based vacuum >> delay and less frequent checkpoints, and it is a *lot* smoother. >> These take a full night to run, so I'll post more results when I >> have usefull stuff to show. >> This has proven to be a very interesting trip to benchmarkland... > > [ rather late in my reply but I had to ] > > Are you tuning mysql in a similar fashion ? Well, the tuning knobs are different, there are no check points or vacuum... but yes I tried to tune MySQL too, but the hardest part was simply making it work without deadlocking continuously.