# Can we fill up our benchmarks?

**URL:** <https://community.rubybench.org/t/can-we-fill-up-our-benchmarks/153>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Created:** [July 31, 2017, 3:10pm UTC](https://community.rubybench.org/t/can-we-fill-up-our-benchmarks/153 "2017-07-31T15:10:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 9

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bmarkons](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/community.rubybench.org/bmarkons/32/87_2.png) [@bmarkons](https://community.rubybench.org/u/bmarkons)\
**Post date:** [August 8, 2017, 9:27am UTC](https://community.rubybench.org/t/can-we-fill-up-our-benchmarks/153/9 "2017-08-08T09:27:27Z")

</div>

I am working on pg suite setup in order to debug this :

> [@Make comparison chart more simple](https://community.rubybench.org/t/make-comparison-chart-more-simple/149/11):
>
> I’ve come across an odd issue while I was trying to reproduce these results locally. After I ran both benchmarks directly on my machine (not in docker) I got Sequel 2x faster than ActiveRecord: sequel/postgres\_discourse - 312 ips activerecord/postgres\_discourse - 162 ips While running same benchmarks in a standard way (inside docker) gave me smaller differences in results: sequel/postgres - 198 ips activerecord/postgres - 153 ips I am super confused with this. Maybe we are missing somethi…

I’ve tried to fix Rails suite which has been broken.

Error saying :

`Could not find gem 'arel (= 9.0.0.alpha)', which is required by gem 'activerecord (= 5.2.0.alpha)', in any of the sources.`

I still haven’t looked into Ruby benchmarks.

---

_[View the full topic](https://community.rubybench.org/t/can-we-fill-up-our-benchmarks/153)._