Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgGzW-0001bP-Tp for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:34:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgGzV-0003yd-Tt for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:34:29 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgGzV-0003yY-6z for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:34:29 +0000 Received: from host36.ns3.it ([80.79.54.36] helo=mail.opinioni.net) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TgGzS-0002tL-Qp for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:34:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.opinioni.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20C1552B43B for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:42:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.opinioni.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (opinioni.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hCooD-ybW0GA for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:42:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.50] (78-134-6-72.v4.ngi.it [78.134.6.72]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.opinioni.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E72A1527CD3 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:42:34 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <50BF6980.3090800@opinioni.net> Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 16:34:24 +0100 From: Andrea Suisani User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: xfs perform a lot better than ext4 [WAS: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance] References: <5076D433.7090605@opinioni.net> <5076DA4E.80504@opinioni.net> <507BC8DE.9050109@opinioni.net> In-Reply-To: <507BC8DE.9050109@opinioni.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org [sorry for resuming an old thread] [cut] >>> Question is... will that remove the performance penalty of HyperThreading? >> >> So I've added to my todo list to perform a test to verify this claim :) > > done. on this box: > in a brief: the box is dell a PowerEdge r720 with 16GB of RAM, > the cpu is a Xeon 5620 with 6 core, the OS is installed on a raid > (sata disk 7.2k rpm) and the PGDATA is on separate RAID 1 array > (sas 15K rpm) and the controller is a PERC H710 (bbwc with a cache > of 512 MB). (ubuntu 12.04) with postgres 9.2.1 and $PGDATA on a ext4 formatted partition i've got: > those are the results: > > HT HT SYSFS DIS HT BIOS DISABLE > -c -t r1 r2 r3 r1 r2 r3 r1 r2 r3 > 5 20K 1641 1831 1496 2020 1974 2033 2005 1988 1967 > 10 10K 2161 2134 2136 2277 2252 2216 1854 1824 1810 > 20 5k 2550 2508 2558 2417 2388 2357 1924 1928 1954 > 30 3333 2216 2272 2250 2333 2493 2496 1993 2009 2008 > 40 2.5K 2179 2221 2250 2568 2535 2500 2025 2048 2018 > 50 2K 2217 2213 2213 2487 2449 2604 2112 2016 2023 on the same machine with the same configuration, having PGDATA on a xfs formatted partition gives me a much better TPS. e.g. pgbench -c 20 -t 5000 gives me 6305 TPS (3 runs with "echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches && /etc/init.d/postgresql-9.2 restart" in between). Anybody else have experienced this kind of differences between etx4 and xfs? Andrea -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance