Benchmarks, like any other SW, need modernizing and updating from time to time.
Given the multi-core CPU approach to higher performance as the
current fad in CPU architecture, we need a benchmark that is appropriate.
If SPEC feels it is appropriate to rev their benchmark suite
regularly, we probably should as well.
Ron Peacetree
At 12:44 AM 12/14/2006, Tom Lane wrote:
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 18:36 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Mostly, though, pgbench just gives the I/O system a workout. It's not a
>> really good general workload.
> It also will not utilize all cpus on a many cpu machine. We recently
> found that the only way to *really* test with pgbench was to actually
> run 4+ copies of pgbench at the same time.
The pgbench app itself becomes the bottleneck at high transaction
rates. Awhile back I rewrote it to improve its ability to issue
commands concurrently, but then desisted from submitting the
changes --- if we change the app like that, future numbers would
be incomparable to past ones, which sort of defeats the purpose of a
benchmark no?
