From: Gary Doades <gpd@gpdnet.co.uk>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 10 Benchmarks Using bonnie++
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 19:33:13 +0100
Message-ID: <4E4C0969.5030401@gpdnet.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <75A85649-2B95-43D5-8404-4776D2E580EC@darkstatic.com>
References: <959BD2FA-0312-458B-BD5F-ED358D2C47ED@darkstatic.com>
<f4e06a7cad34ee9217a3e57fd4eb0e67.squirrel@sq.gransy.com>
<D89151D3-D2E5-47E3-8B90-4A573DAB5FFA@darkstatic.com>
<75A85649-2B95-43D5-8404-4776D2E580EC@darkstatic.com>
On 17/08/2011 7:26 PM, Ogden wrote:
> I am using bonnie++ to benchmark our current Postgres system (on RAID
> 5) with the new one we have, which I have configured with RAID 10. The
> drives are the same (SAS 15K). I tried the new system with ext3 and
> then XFS but the results seem really outrageous as compared to the
> current system, or am I reading things wrong?
>
> The benchmark results are here:
>
> http://malekkoheavyindustry.com/benchmark.html
>
The results are not completely outrageous, however you don't say what
drives, how many and what RAID controller you have in the current and
new systems. You might expect that performance from 10/12 disks in RAID
10 with a good controller. I would say that your current system is
outrageous in that is is so slow!
Cheers,
Gary.
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: gpd@gpdnet.co.uk
Subject: Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 10 Benchmarks Using bonnie++
In-Reply-To: <4E4C0969.5030401@gpdnet.co.uk>
* 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