Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 00:57:51 -0600 From: "Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> To: freebsd-database@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Horrible PostgreSQL performance with NFS Message-ID: <20060209065751.GA57845@decibel.org> In-Reply-To: <200601221049.k0MAnaVh089477@lurza.secnetix.de> References: <20060119011550.GN17896@decibel.org> <200601221049.k0MAnaVh089477@lurza.secnetix.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 11:49:36AM +0100, Oliver Fromme wrote: > FWIW, there is _no_ blocksize that can be used wit dd(1) > that benchmarks disks the same way a database does. > Unless our dd(1) implemetation grew a random-seek option > that I missed. :-) > > But seriously... dd(1) is NOT a benchmark. Never ever. > Especially if you're interested in database performance. OLAP databases depend heavily on sequential scans, which are the same as dd. dd is also useful to find out what your maximum throughput is. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel@decibel.org Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060209065751.GA57845>