

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vince Vielhaber [mailto:vev@michvhf.com] 
> Sent: 29 January 2003 16:57
> To: Katie Ward
> Cc: Dave Page; Tom Lane; Curtis Faith; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: RE: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System
> 
> 
> The code's been available for what a week or two?  Do you 
> actually think that can be considered conclusive by any standard?

Public beta testing (but closed source) has been going on for some
months.

Regards, Dave.

Wed, 29 Jan 2003 16:58:57 -0000
"Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote:

> > The code's been available for what a week or two?  Do you
> > actually think that can be considered conclusive by any standard?
>
> Public beta testing (but closed source) has been going on for some
> months.

So you've been running these unscientific tests you're telling us
about being so successful for "some months"?

Vince.
-- 
 Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond!  http://www.pop4.net/
   http://www.meanstreamradio.com       http://www.unknown-artists.com
         Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.


Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:12:34 -0500 (EST)
Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com>
Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System
Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote:
> 
> 
>>>The code's been available for what a week or two?  Do you
>>>actually think that can be considered conclusive by any standard?
>>
>>Public beta testing (but closed source) has been going on for some
>>months.
> 
> 
> So you've been running these unscientific tests you're telling us
> about being so successful for "some months"?
> 
> Vince.

I open my mouth and insert foot:  Where do I get any of these scientific 
tests to determine if the latest and greatest 7.3.x will not fall down on my 
favorite Unix?

James Hubbard


Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:36:36 -0500
James Hubbard <jhubbard@mcs.uvawise.edu>
Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, James Hubbard wrote:

> Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>The code's been available for what a week or two?  Do you
> >>>actually think that can be considered conclusive by any standard?
> >>
> >>Public beta testing (but closed source) has been going on for some
> >>months.
> >
> >
> > So you've been running these unscientific tests you're telling us
> > about being so successful for "some months"?
> >
> > Vince.
>
> I open my mouth and insert foot:  Where do I get any of these scientific
> tests to determine if the latest and greatest 7.3.x will not fall down on my
> favorite Unix?

If you're looking for a tool to test with, there was an announcement here
not too long ago for one.  But it goes beyond just running a test suite
against it.  Many of the available tools are designed to test what works
and how well it works.  Testing goes beyond that.  You want to know what
doesn't work, does the database return to a normal state if the unthinkable
happens (eg. Tom's suggestion of yanking the plug), how about loss of
network communications or sudden intermittant communication?  Or the
function that may not be checking its input that well - when it fails is
everything ok or did that transaction someone else was in the middle of
get blown away?

A gal that used to do MSDOS testing for MS (Jen something, don't recall
her last name) would pull a floppy out in the middle of read or write
and found a certain sequence would either hose the floppy, get the system
to reboot (don't recall the exact details, it's been YEARS).

Vince.
-- 
 Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond!  http://www.pop4.net/
   http://www.meanstreamradio.com       http://www.unknown-artists.com
         Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.


Wed, 29 Jan 2003 13:04:11 -0500 (EST)
Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com>
Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System
James Hubbard wrote:
<snip>
> I open my mouth and insert foot:  Where do I get any of these scientific 
> tests to determine if the latest and greatest 7.3.x will not fall down 
> on my favorite Unix?

For Open Source benchmarks, there is:

Open Source Database Benchmark:
http://osdb.sf.net

With this, you *want* to use the latest CVS version, as that can 
generate it's own datasets of any size.  The older, released versions 
couldn't and you had to download databases of limited size.


Database Opensource Test Suite:
http://ltp.sourceforge.net/dotshowto.php

This works with DB2, Oracle, Sybase, MySQL, and PostgreSQL, and looks to 
have been developed by IBM.  Haven't yet used this, but did notice that 
the configuration instructions make no reference to upping the memory 
buffers.  i.e. all of the tests they've done were probably with the 
defaults (yuck!)

Emailed this group yesterday asking if they're open to suggestions for 
improvement, and they said they definitely are.  If anyone has specific 
they'd like to let them know, they do seem open to it.


A commercial solution that people often mention is Benchmark Factory:

http://www.benchmarkfactory.com

Haven't personally used it, although it's apparently the software that 
Great Bridge used for all of their testing.


Hope this helps.

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


> James Hubbard


-- 
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi


Thu, 30 Jan 2003 04:44:33 +1030
Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org>
Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System
Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>So you've been running these unscientific tests you're telling us
>>>about being so successful for "some months"?
>>>
>>>Vince.
>>
>>I open my mouth and insert foot:  Where do I get any of these scientific
>>tests to determine if the latest and greatest 7.3.x will not fall down on my
>>favorite Unix?
> 
> 
> If you're looking for a tool to test with, there was an announcement here
> not too long ago for one.  But it goes beyond just running a test suite
> against it.  Many of the available tools are designed to test what works
> and how well it works.  Testing goes beyond that.  You want to know what
> doesn't work, does the database return to a normal state if the unthinkable
> happens (eg. Tom's suggestion of yanking the plug), how about loss of
> network communications or sudden intermittant communication?  Or the
> function that may not be checking its input that well - when it fails is
> everything ok or did that transaction someone else was in the middle of
> get blown away?
> 
> A gal that used to do MSDOS testing for MS (Jen something, don't recall
> her last name) would pull a floppy out in the middle of read or write
> and found a certain sequence would either hose the floppy, get the system
> to reboot (don't recall the exact details, it's been YEARS).
> 

I'm not disagreeing with you on testing.  I've seen the announcments. 
Justin Clift just posted them again.  But, as far as I've seen there are no 
real scientific tests that anyone here has posted.  I've seen the occasional 
post with db_bench.  You asked "To what standards?"  I've not seen any 
standards that are meaningful.  Maybe I'm just not looking.

Any benchmarks/tests that someone posts are going to be subjective anyway. 
  No one seems to be using the same tool.  The osdb is step in the right 
direction, but I've not really seen anyone using it.  The regressions are 
the only thing that I can see and run. It would be nice if there were a few 
people that had test setups that could post benchmarks/tests, so that we 
could see how things look for each release.
(i.e.:  on the 5GB test, it did this; when I cut the power and turned it 
back onn it did this and this.)

When I download, install, and use postgresql, I take it on faith that it 
will perform as the developers say that it does. Maybe this is a bad thing, 
but I don't think so    My use of it is very meager at the best so I don't 
have a lot to worry about.  If I had loads of data and mission critical apps 
I would probably test a lot, but I don't.

All I'm saying is to cut them some slack and give them some ideas to test 
until there is a really good testing/benchmarking tool that everyone can use 
that won't be as subjective.

I personally want this to succeed.  After having to use MySQL for a class 
project, I don't really want to use it again. I had to use because it was 
the only cross platform tool. Not everyone in the class was running linux or 
xBSD, so I had to go with MySQL.   From what I've seen, It looks like I'll 
have to anyhow because that's what many job ads are looking for.

I believe Oracle used the excuse that PostgreSQL was unproven, when they 
complained about its use for the .org registry. What we may think about 
Windows being fragile and being a piece of crap doesn't really matter. 
People are using it and it's at least doing they want.

I've probably not said this before, but I appreciate all the hard work that 
everyone puts into this project.

James Hubbard





Wed, 29 Jan 2003 13:53:53 -0500
James Hubbard <jhubbard@mcs.uvawise.edu>
Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System