From: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
To: Alexandre Barros <alexandre@vectorx.com.br>
Cc: postgres performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: performance drop on RAID5
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 09:17:42 -0700
Message-ID: <430C9DA6.2080801@commandprompt.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <430C8779.9080500@vectorx.com.br>
References: <430C8779.9080500@vectorx.com.br>
Alexandre Barros wrote:
> Hello,
> i have a pg-8.0.3 running on Linux kernel 2.6.8, CPU Sempron
> 2600+, 1Gb RAM on IDE HD ( which could be called a "heavy desktop" ),
> measuring this performance with pgbench ( found on /contrib ) it gave
> me an average ( after several runs ) of 170 transactions per second;
That is going to be because IDE drives LIE about write times because of
the large cache.
> for the sake of experimentation ( actually, i'm scared this IDE drive
> could fail at any time, hence i'm looking for an alternative, more
> "robust", machine ), i've installed on an aging Compaq Proliant server
> ( freshly compiled SMP kernel 2.6.12.5 with preemption ), dual
> Pentium III Xeon 500Mhz, 512Mb RAM, (older) SCSI-2 80pin drives, and
> re-tested, when the database was on a single SCSI drive, pgbench gave
> me an average of 90 transactions per second, but, and that scared me
> most, when the database was on a RAID-5 array ( four 9Gb disks, using
> linux software RAID mdadm and LVM2, with the default filesystem
> cluster size of 32Kb ), the performance dropped to about 55
> transactions per second.
That seems more reasonable and probably truthful. I would be curious
what type of performance you would get with the exact same
setup EXCEPT remove LVM2. Just have the software RAID. In fact, since
you have 4 drives you could do RAID 10.
>
> i wouldn't be so stunned if the newer machine was ( say ) twice faster
> than the older server, but over three times faster is disturbing.
>
> the postgresql.conf of both machines is here:
>
> max_connections = 50
> shared_buffers = 1000 # min 16, at least max_connections*2,
> 8KB each
You should look at the annotated conf:
http://www.powerpostgresql.com/Downloads/annotated_conf_80.html
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
> debug_print_parse = false
> debug_print_rewritten = false
> debug_print_plan = false
> debug_pretty_print = false
> log_statement = 'all'
> log_parser_stats = false
> log_planner_stats = false
> log_executor_stats = false
> log_statement_stats = false
> lc_messages = 'en_US' # locale for system error message strings
> lc_monetary = 'en_US' # locale for monetary formatting
> lc_numeric = 'en_US' # locale for number formatting
> lc_time = 'en_US' # locale for time formatting
>
> many thanks in advance !
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: jd@commandprompt.com, alexandre@vectorx.com.br
Subject: Re: performance drop on RAID5
In-Reply-To: <430C9DA6.2080801@commandprompt.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
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