Horton

Re: Perfomance degradation 9.3 (vs 9.2) for FreeBSD

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>

View thread
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
Cc: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>, girgen@freebsd.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, robertmhaas@gmail.com, ftigeot@wolfpond.org, Tom Sparks <tgs@norse-corp.com>
Date: 2014-04-27T01:15:22Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Add shared_memory_type GUC.

Jim,

* Jim Nasby (jim@nasby.net) wrote:
> On 4/22/14, 5:01 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >We also have colo space and power, etc.  So this would be the whole deal.  The cluster would be up for as long as needed.
> >
> >Are the machine specs sufficient?  Any other things we should look for?
> >
> >CC'd Tom on this email.
> 
> Did anyone respond to this off-list?

Yes, I did follow-up with Tom.  I'll do so again, as the discussion had
died down.

> Would these machines be more useful as dedicated performance test servers for the community or generic BenchFarm members?

I don't believe they would be terribly useful as buildfarm systems; we
could set up similar systems with VMs to just run the regression tests.
Where I see these systems being particularly valuable would be as the
start of our performance farm, and perhaps one of the systems as a PG
infrastructure server.

	Thanks!

		Stephen