TPC Benchmark Status
June 2000 |
TPC Benchmark Status is published about every two months.
The first and primary purpose of the newsletter is to keep interested parties informed about the content, issues, and schedule of the TPC's benchmark development efforts. The second purpose is to invite new members to join these important development efforts.
We've already outlined most of the reasons for joining the TPC in another article, Why Join.
To receive the status report by email, please click here.
|
| Last Meeting |
TPC held a General Council meeting on June 28 and 29 in Beaverton, Oregon.
|
| TPC-C |
| TPC-C Version 4 did not pass the recent Mail Ballot of the TPC Members. The reasons given for not passing the benchmark were: |
- Did not meet performance goals
- Did not reduce the number of disk drives needed sufficiently
- Cost of Implementation
- Success of TPC-C Version 3
- Loss of Comparability with older results
|
The subcommittee will investigate modifying the current version of TPC-C with some non-workload changes to enhance the specification. These changes have not been outlined yet, but could involve pricing changes, run-time measurement changes and reporting changes.
|
| TPC R/H Workgroup Report |
At the April meeting in Palo Alto, there was some discussion about moving TPC-R and TPC-H from a 5-year to a 3-year pricing model. However, no action was taken perhaps because of the associated difficulties in results comparison that would require a major benchmark revision. No R/H business was conducted at the June meting.
|
| TPC-DS Working Group |
The April meeting saw a great deal of detailed work on the data warehouse schema, along with discussions on the nature of possible transformations from a small ODS (Operational Data Store) schema into the warehouse. A presentation enumerating further candidate transformations from the ODS into the DW (Data Warehouse) was given in June. The current thinking is to model transformations (duplicate elimination, de-normalizing joins, pivoting etc.) that can be implemented in SQL as a part of the benchmark. Meikel Poess from Oracle was elected chair of the Working Group.
|
| TPC-W Subcommittee |
The TPC-W subcommittee corrected typographical errors and clarified
ambiguous areas of the TPC-W 1.0 specification. The typographical changes were included
in Version 1.0.1 and the clarifications were passed in version 1.1. The General Council
agreed and passed all subcommittee motions. Both versions can be used for publication at
this time. After August 28th version 1.1 must be used.
|
| All Benchmark Status Reports |
|
|
