On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Greg Smith <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Josh Berkus wrote: >> >> That doesn't make much sense unless there's some special advantage to a >> 4K blocksize with the hardware itself. > > Given that pgbench is always doing tiny updates to blocks, I wouldn't be > surprised if switching to smaller blocks helps it in a lot of situations if > one went looking for them. Also, as you point out, pgbench runtime varies > around wildly enough that 10% would need more investigation to really prove > that means something. But I think Yeb has done plenty of investigation into > the most interesting part here, the durability claims. Running the tests for longer helps a lot on reducing the noisy results. Also letting them runs longer means that the background writer and autovacuum start getting involved, so the test becomes somewhat more realistic. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
