Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35CE164FCCB; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:54:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 59767-08; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:54:22 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from tamriel.snowman.net (tamriel.snowman.net [72.66.115.51]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EE7F64FCC0; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:54:21 -0300 (ADT) Received: by tamriel.snowman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4F47D22276; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:54:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:54:20 -0400 From: Stephen Frost To: Mikkel =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F8gh?= Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Drupal and PostgreSQL - performance issues? Message-ID: <20081013045420.GD4452@tamriel.snowman.net> Mail-Followup-To: Mikkel =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F8gh?= , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-general@postgresql.org References: <2434A118-CEFA-43A9-BA88-006EC1F80326@hoegh.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rz+pwK2yUstbofK6" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2434A118-CEFA-43A9-BA88-006EC1F80326@hoegh.org> X-Editor: Vim http://www.vim.org/ X-Info: http://www.snowman.net X-Operating-System: Linux/2.6.26-1-amd64 (x86_64) X-Uptime: 00:40:12 up 7 days, 22:59, 14 users, load average: 0.15, 0.03, 0.01 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200810/447 X-Sequence-Number: 138696 --rz+pwK2yUstbofK6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Mikkel H=F8gh (mikkel@hoegh.org) wrote: > I have been testing it a bit performance-wise, and the numbers are =20 > worrying. In my test, MySQL (using InnoDB) had a 40% lead in =20 > performance, but I'm unsure whether this is indicative for PostgreSQL =20 > performance in general or perhaps a misconfiguration on my part. The comments left on your blog would probably be a good first step, if you're not doing them already.. Connection pooling could definitely help if you're not already doing it. Drupal's MySQL-isms don't help things either, of course. Also, you don't post anything about the PostgreSQL config, nor the hardware it's running on. The default PostgreSQL config usually isn't appropriate for decent hardware and that could be a contributing factor here. It would also be useful to make sure you've analyze'd your tables and didn't just do a fresh load w/o any statistics having been gathered. We run Drupal on PostgreSQL for an internal site and it works reasonably well. We havn't had any performance problems but it's not a terribly large site either. The issues we've had tend to come from PostgreSQL's somewhat less-than-supported status with Drupal. I've been meaning to look into Drupal's PG support to see about improving it. Perhaps this winter I'll get a chance to. Thanks, Stephen --rz+pwK2yUstbofK6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjy1HwACgkQrzgMPqB3kigtGwCbBBfnVG50Pk/w9DnDEP/KAwRm f2IAn0U3qgL3dv33shY8UAx/Cu6RSeUd =fdhL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rz+pwK2yUstbofK6--