On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 7:10 AM, tuanhoanganh <hatuan05@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Here is my new pgbench's point > > pgbench -h 127.0.0.1 -p 9999 -U postgres -c 200 -t 100 -s 10 pgbench Your -c should always be the same or lower than -s. Anything higher and you're just thrashing your IO system waiting for locks. Note that -s is ignored on runs if you're not doing -i. Also -t 100 is too small to get a good test, try at least 1000 or 10000 and let it run a minute. > Scale option ignored, using pgbench_branches table count = 10 > starting vacuum...end. > transaction type: TPC-B (sort of) > scaling factor: 10 > query mode: simple > number of clients: 200 > number of threads: 1 > number of transactions per client: 100 > number of transactions actually processed: 20000/20000 > tps = 202.556936 (including connections establishing) > tps = 225.498811 (excluding connections establishing) > I have server computer install Windows 2008R2, PostgreSQL 9.0.1 64 bit, 8G > RAM, RAID 10 - 4 disks > > Is it common pgbench 's point with my server ? That's a pretty reasonable number for that class machine. I assume you do NOT have a battery backed caching RAID controller or it would be WAY higher. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
