Re: test_fsync label adjustments

From: "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: test_fsync label adjustments
Date: 2011-01-18 21:57:39
Message-ID: 069D41A4-83DE-43A7-9947-2678BB0915C1@themactionfaction.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Jan 18, 2011, at 3:55 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> I have modified test_fsync to use test labels that match wal_sync_method
> values, and and added more tests for open_sync with different sizes.
> This should make the program easier for novices to understand. Here is
> a test run for Ubuntu 11.04:
>
> $ ./test_fsync
> 2000 operations per test
>
> Compare file sync methods using one 8k write:
> (in wal_sync_method preference order, except fdatasync
> is Linux's default)
> open_datasync (non-direct I/O)* 85.127 ops/sec
> open_datasync (direct I/O) 87.119 ops/sec
> fdatasync 81.006 ops/sec
> fsync 82.621 ops/sec
> fsync_writethrough n/a
> open_sync (non-direct I/O)* 84.412 ops/sec
> open_sync (direct I/O) 91.006 ops/sec
> * This non-direct I/O mode is not used by Postgres.

I am curious how this is targeted at novices. A naive user might enable the "fastest" option which could be exactly wrong. For this to be useful to novices, I suspect the tool will need to generate platform-specific suggestions, no?

Cheers,
M

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-01-18 21:58:15 Re: Fixing GIN for empty/null/full-scan cases
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-01-18 21:52:43 Re: ToDo List Item - System Table Index Clustering