At 10:56 27/02/01 +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
>
>> > I agree that 30k looks like the magic delay, and probably 30/5 would be a
>> > good conservative choice. But now I think about the choice of number, I
>> > think it must vary with the speed of the machine and length of the
>> > transact
> > I agree that 30k looks like the magic delay, and probably 30/5 would be a
> > good conservative choice. But now I think about the choice of number, I
> > think it must vary with the speed of the machine and length of the
> > transactions; at 20tps, each TX is completing in around 50ms.
I thi
One thing that I remember from a performance test we once did is, that the results
are a lot more realistic, better and more stable, if you try to decouple the startup
of
the different clients a little bit, so they are not all in the same section of code at
the same time.
We inserted random u
