| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Evgeny Rodichev <er(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: win32 performance - fsync question |
| Date: | 2005-02-17 19:20:50 |
| Message-ID: | 9957.1108668050@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> WinXP fsync = true 20-28 tps
>> WinXP fsync = false 600 tps
>> Linux fsync = true 800 tps
>> Linux fsync = false 980 tps
> Wow, that's terrible on Windows. If there's a solution, it'd be nice to
> backport it...
Actually, the number that's way out of line there is the Linux w/fsync
one. I infer that he's got disk write cache enabled and therefore the
transactions aren't really being synced to disk at all.
Any claimed TPS rate exceeding your disk drive's rotation rate is a
red flag.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2005-02-17 19:21:31 | Re: win32 performance - fsync question |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2005-02-17 19:14:00 | Re: win32 performance - fsync question |