From jmpinyol@endepro.com Wed Dec 21 09:05:17 2005 X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 692D69DC9B3 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 05:05:17 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 72753-05 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 05:05:17 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from alatxa.lapeixera.org (unknown [212.31.60.122]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A6449DC813 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 05:05:13 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alatxa.lapeixera.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E766073CD2 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:04:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from alatxa.lapeixera.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (alatxa [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 06323-01 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:04:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.2.2.28] (unknown [10.2.2.28]) by alatxa.lapeixera.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0957373C8E for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:04:48 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <43A91ABE.9070000@endepro.com> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:05:02 +0100 From: Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca Organization: Endepro User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: ca MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Windows performance again Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at lapeixera.org X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 required=5 tests=[none] X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/527 X-Sequence-Number: 16348 Hello, We have the next scenario: Linux box with postgresql 7.2.1-1 (client) Windows XP with postgresql 8.1.1 (server) Windows XP with postgresql 8.1.1 (client) All connected in 10Mb LAN In server box, we have a table with 65000 rows and usign "psql" we have these results: Linux box with psql version 7.2.1 versus Windows XP server: select * from ; -> 7 seconds aprox. to obtain a results. Network utilization: 100% Windows XP client box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server: select * from
; -> 60 seconds aprox. to obtain a results!!!!!!!!!!!! Network utilization: 3% Windows XP server box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server: select * from
; -> <1 seconds aprox. to obtain a results. Network utilization: 0% Is a really problem, because we are migrating a old server to 8.0 version in a windows box, and our application works really slow.... Thanks in advance, Josep Maria -- Josep Maria Pinyol i Fontseca Responsable àrea de programació ENDEPRO - Enginyeria de programari Passeig Anselm Clavé, 19 Bx. 08263 Callús (Barcelona) Tel. +34 936930018 - Mob. +34 600310755 - Fax. +34 938361994 jmpinyol@endepro.com - http://www.endepro.com Aquest missatge i els documents en el seu cas adjunts, es dirigeixen exclusivament al seu destinatari i poden contenir informació reservada i/o CONFIDENCIAL, us del qual no està autoritzat ni la divulgació del mateix, prohibit per la legislació vigent (Llei 32/2002 SSI-CE). Si ha rebut aquest missatge per error, li demanem que ens ho comuniqui immediatament per la mateixa via o bé per telèfon (+34936930018) i procedeixi a la seva destrucció. Aquest e-mail no podrà considerar-se SPAM. Este mensaje, y los documentos en su caso anexos, se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario y pueden contener información reservada y/o CONFIDENCIAL cuyo uso no autorizado o divulgación está prohibida por la legislación vigente (Ley 32/2002 SSI-CE). Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía o por teléfono (+34936930018) y proceda a su destrucción. Este e-mail no podrá considerarse SPAM. This message and the enclosed documents are directed exclusively to its receiver and can contain reserved and/or confidential information, from which use isn’t allowed its divulgation, forbidden by the current legislation (Law 32/2002 SSI-CE). If you have received this message by mistake, we kindly ask you to communicate it to us right away by the same way or by phone (+34936930018) and destruct it. This e-mail can’t be considered as SPAM. From dev@archonet.com Wed Dec 21 10:04:37 2005 X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 375C59DC80C for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 06:04:37 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 90971-05 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 06:04:38 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mail.metronet.co.uk (mail.metronet.co.uk [213.162.97.75]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7AF9DC823 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 06:04:34 -0400 (AST) Received: from mainbox.archonet.com (84-51-143-99.archon037.adsl.metronet.co.uk [84.51.143.99]) by smtp.metronet.co.uk (MetroNet Mail) with ESMTP id EE941424FDC; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:58:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.1.17] (client17.office.archonet.com [192.168.1.17]) by mainbox.archonet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B3D515EA4; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:58:49 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <43A92758.6060709@archonet.com> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:58:48 +0000 From: Richard Huxton User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Windows performance again References: <43A91ABE.9070000@endepro.com> In-Reply-To: <43A91ABE.9070000@endepro.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.016 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.016] X-Spam-Score: 0.016 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/528 X-Sequence-Number: 16349 Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca wrote: > > Linux box with psql version 7.2.1 versus Windows XP server: > > select * from
; -> 7 seconds aprox. to obtain a results. > Network utilization: 100% > > Windows XP client box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server: > > select * from
; -> 60 seconds aprox. to obtain a results!!!!!!!!!!!! > Network utilization: 3% > > Windows XP server box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server: > > select * from
; -> <1 seconds aprox. to obtain a results. > Network utilization: 0% It's *got* to be the network configuration on the client machine. I'd be tempted to install ethereal on the linux box and watch for the difference between the two networked sessions. I'm guessing it might be something to do with TCP/IP window/buffer sizes and delays on ACKs - this certainly used to be an issue on older MS systems, but I must admit I thought they'd fixed it for XP. If not that, could some firewall/security system be slowing network traffic? -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd From gsstark@mit.edu Wed Dec 21 14:48:34 2005 X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E7299DCABD for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:48:34 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 31427-06 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:48:37 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from stark.xeocode.com (stark.xeocode.com [216.58.44.227]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600E49DC9B3 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:48:31 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stark.xeocode.com) by stark.xeocode.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Ep5GR-0005TZ-00; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:48:24 -0500 To: Richard Huxton Cc: Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Windows performance again References: <43A91ABE.9070000@endepro.com> <43A92758.6060709@archonet.com> In-Reply-To: <43A92758.6060709@archonet.com> From: Greg Stark Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992 Date: 21 Dec 2005 09:48:23 -0500 Message-ID: <874q52a4lk.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> Lines: 12 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.08 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.080] X-Spam-Score: 0.08 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/535 X-Sequence-Number: 16356 Richard Huxton writes: > Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca wrote: > > Windows XP client box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server: > > select * from
; -> 60 seconds aprox. to obtain a results!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Network utilization: 3% The 60 seconds sounds suspiciously like a DNS problem. -- greg From tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us Wed Dec 21 16:10:43 2005 X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 877CA9DC809 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:10:43 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 67063-05 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:10:42 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC7F9DC807 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:10:40 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBLGAXBX013701; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 11:10:33 -0500 (EST) To: Richard Huxton cc: Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Windows performance again In-reply-to: <43A92758.6060709@archonet.com> References: <43A91ABE.9070000@endepro.com> <43A92758.6060709@archonet.com> Comments: In-reply-to Richard Huxton message dated "Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:58:48 +0000" Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 11:10:33 -0500 Message-ID: <13700.1135181433@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.028 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.028] X-Spam-Score: 0.028 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/536 X-Sequence-Number: 16357 Richard Huxton writes: > Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca wrote: >> Network utilization: 0% > It's *got* to be the network configuration on the client machine. We've seen gripes of this sort before --- check the list archives for possible fixes. I seem to recall something about a "QoS patch", as well as suggestions to get rid of third-party packages that might be interfering with the TCP stack. regards, tom lane From merlin.moncure@rcsonline.com Wed Dec 21 18:40:16 2005 X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF829DC84B for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:40:16 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94877-02 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:40:15 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from Herge.rcsinc.local (mail.rcsonline.com [70.89.208.142]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D79569DC828 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:40:13 -0400 (AST) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Subject: Re: Windows performance again Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:40:09 -0500 Message-ID: <6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3417DDBA4@Herge.rcsinc.local> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] Windows performance again Thread-Index: AcYGSSrNZldUs6qCRKOah9XkbFeJaQABD0Jg From: "Merlin Moncure" To: "Tom Lane" Cc: , "Richard Huxton" , "Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca" , X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.02 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020] X-Spam-Score: 0.02 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/539 X-Sequence-Number: 16360 > > It's *got* to be the network configuration on the client machine. >=20 > We've seen gripes of this sort before --- check the list archives for > possible fixes. I seem to recall something about a "QoS patch", as > well as suggestions to get rid of third-party packages that might be > interfering with the TCP stack. I personally checked out the last report from a poster who got the issue on win2k but not on winxp. I ran his exact dump into my 2k server with no problems. This is definitely some type of local issue. Josep: does your table have any large ( > 1k ) fields in it? Merlin