Simon Riggs wrote:

We obviously need a performance build farm and I think everyone accepts
that. We just need to do it, so that's a given and is something I hope
to be involved in.



It's on my list ... Had I but world enough and time ...

Performance testing can be bolted onto the exiting buildfarm as an option. However, performance test machines have some requirements that pure functional/build test machines don't have: especially stability. A standard buildfarm client can be put on almost any machine and run happily. My main workstation runs four buildfarm members including three in a VM, and I never notice any impact. But a performance test machine probably needs to be dedicated to just that function. And at least some members of the performance test machines would need to be higher end machines. The number of people who can afford such resources is much lower than those who can run a relatively low impact simple buildfarm member.

Maybe we also need to talk about running clients elsewhere for performance testing too.

We also need to talk about what would be a good set of tests to run.

One useful thing this would buy us is a time series of test results so we could easily see sudden degradations in performance. It must have been annoying trying to triangulate performance dropoff recently.

cheers

andrew


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

               http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Reply via email to