From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: sniff test on some PG 8.4 numbers
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:02:07 -0800
Message-ID: <5136958F.5050508@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKuK5J0f4O8s=2XmAB0to2mOoke4csnj48NDpy+5dYU9sW9WuQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKuK5J0f4O8s=2XmAB0to2mOoke4csnj48NDpy+5dYU9sW9WuQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
> Do these basically sniff right?
Well, the read test seems reasonable. I'm impressed by the speed of the
write test ... how large is the raid card cache?
And why 8.4? Can you try 9.2?
> (NOTE: with barriers off, I get a slight increase - 10% - in the
> read-write test, and a larger *decrease* - 15% - with the read-only
> test @ 400. No change @ 100)
Oh, interesting. Can you reproduce that? I wonder what would cause
read-only to drop without barriers ...
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
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: josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: sniff test on some PG 8.4 numbers
In-Reply-To: <5136958F.5050508@agliodbs.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