Re: A kind of... benchmark?

Brian Peasland <dba_at_remove_spam.peasland.com> wrote:

I really don't understand why you guys get that philosophical. As I explained, my only concern was to gain OBJECTIVE, REPRODUCIBLE, ARTIFICIALLY consistent metrics about how a number of typical operations in a database performs.

To put it simple, let's assume that I want to assess the effect of using locally managed tablespaces instead of dictionary managed. Why the hell would it be senseless to run such a benchmak in databases with corresonding tablespaces and compare the results?

Even simpler. If we purchased a new server - something totally different (OS, Harddisks, CPU) and we were asked by the managers (who understand NOTHING about databases) how much faster this system is, I could tell them based on the benchmark. Then, they would know if spending the money was a right decision.

The simplest case. Run the benchmark. Reorganize the database. Rerun the benchmark. Kill a myth or stick at it.

Run the benchmark. Setup parallelism. Rerun the benchmark. Got it?

By the way, your answers disrespect my declared intention. OK, you wouldn't use such a benchmark. But I would, so if you wish to contribute dispite your opinion, you're welcome. What I asked was, do you know a set of SQL statements compiled specially to probe performance of typical database operations? Nothing more than that.

Thanks again
Rick Denoire Received on Thu Aug 07 2003 - 16:43:22 CDT