pg.ddx.io pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedBenchmarks
3+ messages / 3 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Benchmarks
@ 2006-08-22 20:59 Charles Sprickman <spork@bway.net>
2006-08-28 02:26 ` Re: Benchmarks Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Charles Sprickman @ 2006-08-22 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
Hi all,
I'm really glad to see all the test results people are posting here. In
fact, I used info from the archives to put together our first "big"
database host:
-Tyan dual-core/dual-cpu mainboard (
-One Opteron 270 2.0GHz (although our vendor gave us two for some reason)
-Chenbro 3U case (RM31212B) - OK, but not very well thought-out
-8 Seagate SATA drives (yes, we stuck with our vendor of choice, WD
Raptors may have been a better choice)
-3Ware 9550SX-12MI
-2GB RAM (we'll get more when we need it)
So this thing is sitting next to my desk and I'd like to see just how this
compares to other hardware. We already know that it will blow away our
normal dual-xeon 1Us with just two U320 drives on Adaptec 2120s ZCR cards.
We also know that for what this box will be doing (mailing list archives
with msgs stored in Postgres) it's going to be more than enough for the
next few years...
So what are people using to get a general feel for the bang/buck ratio?
I've toyed with Bonnie, IOZone and simple "dd" writes. I'd like to go a
little further and actually hit Postgres to see how the entire system
performs. My reasons are, in no particular order:
-to learn something (general and pgsql tuning)
-to help guide future database server builds
-to take the benchmark data and share it somewhere
The first one is obvious. Matching software to hardware is really hard
and there aren't too many people that can do it well.
The second is a pretty big deal - we've been doing all 1U builds and
currently spread our load amongst individual db servers that also do the
web front end for mailing list management. This has worked OK, but we may
want to peel off the db section and start moving towards two large boxes
like this with one replicating the other as a backup.
That last one is a stickler. I've seen so much data posted on this list,
is there any project in the works to collect this? It seems like some
RAID hardware just totally sucks (cough *Adaptec* cough). Having a site
that listed results for the more common benchmarks and sorting it out by
hardware would help reduce the number of people that get burned by buying
overpriced/underperforming RAID controllers/SANs.
Any thoughts on all this?
I'll be throwing in some quick stats on the box described above later
today... At first glance, the 3Ware controller is really looking like an
excellent value.
Thanks,
Charles
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Benchmarks
2006-08-22 20:59 Benchmarks Charles Sprickman <spork@bway.net>
@ 2006-08-28 02:26 ` Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
2006-08-28 16:02 ` Re: Benchmarks Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Merlin Moncure @ 2006-08-28 02:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Charles Sprickman <spork@bway.net>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
> -Tyan dual-core/dual-cpu mainboard (
> -One Opteron 270 2.0GHz (although our vendor gave us two for some reason)
> -Chenbro 3U case (RM31212B) - OK, but not very well thought-out
> -8 Seagate SATA drives (yes, we stuck with our vendor of choice, WD
> Raptors may have been a better choice)
> -3Ware 9550SX-12MI
> -2GB RAM (we'll get more when we need it)
yes, you should have bought raptors :)
> So what are people using to get a general feel for the bang/buck ratio?
> I've toyed with Bonnie, IOZone and simple "dd" writes. I'd like to go a
> little further and actually hit Postgres to see how the entire system
> performs. My reasons are, in no particular order:
also pgbench.
> The second is a pretty big deal - we've been doing all 1U builds and
> currently spread our load amongst individual db servers that also do the
> web front end for mailing list management. This has worked OK, but we may
> want to peel off the db section and start moving towards two large boxes
> like this with one replicating the other as a backup.
imo, this is a smart move.
> That last one is a stickler. I've seen so much data posted on this list,
> is there any project in the works to collect this? It seems like some
> RAID hardware just totally sucks (cough *Adaptec* cough). Having a site
> that listed results for the more common benchmarks and sorting it out by
> hardware would help reduce the number of people that get burned by buying
> overpriced/underperforming RAID controllers/SANs.
just post to this list :) hardware moves quick so published
information quickly loses its value. one warning, many people focus
overmuch on sequential i/o, watch out for that.
> I'll be throwing in some quick stats on the box described above later
> today... At first glance, the 3Ware controller is really looking like an
> excellent value.
they are pretty decent. the benchmark is software raid which actually
outperforms many hardware controllers. adaptec is complete trash,
they even dropped support of their command line utilty for the
controller on linux, ugh. ibm serveraid controllers are rebranded
adaptect btw.
merlin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Benchmarks
2006-08-22 20:59 Benchmarks Charles Sprickman <spork@bway.net>
2006-08-28 02:26 ` Re: Benchmarks Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
@ 2006-08-28 16:02 ` Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Scott Marlowe @ 2006-08-28 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>; +Cc: Charles Sprickman <spork@bway.net>; pgsql-performance
On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 21:26, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > I'll be throwing in some quick stats on the box described above later
> > today... At first glance, the 3Ware controller is really looking like an
> > excellent value.
>
> they are pretty decent. the benchmark is software raid which actually
> outperforms many hardware controllers. adaptec is complete trash,
> they even dropped support of their command line utilty for the
> controller on linux, ugh. ibm serveraid controllers are rebranded
> adaptect btw.
Just a followup on this. Last place I worked we had a bunch of Dell
2600 boxen with Adaptec RAID controllers. Due to the horribly
unreliable behaviour of these machines with those controllers (random
lockups etc...) we switched off the RAID and went to software mirror
sets under linux. The machines because very stable, and as an added
bonus, the performance was higher as well.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-08-28 16:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-08-22 20:59 Benchmarks Charles Sprickman <spork@bway.net>
2006-08-28 02:26 ` Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
2006-08-28 16:02 ` Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox