From: Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>
To: Mkrtchyan, Tigran <tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
Cc: postgres performance list <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 11:58:48 +1200
Message-ID: <541CC338.5090700@catalyst.net.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <212134052.46894.1411111441514.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
References: <45142416.42827.1411033201079.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
<CAHyXU0xSJR=r4savNfMcpzxBh9ZzgMc4aZtD4DxramZiexkYSw@mail.gmail.com>
<541B4704.9090305@catalyst.net.nz>
<609416895.45709.1411074654752.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
<541B59AD.9020109@catalyst.net.nz>
<541B6161.2040605@catalyst.net.nz>
<753223953.46319.1411106018106.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
<541BCC93.9070204@catalyst.net.nz>
<212134052.46894.1411111441514.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
On 19/09/14 19:24, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mark Kirkwood" <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>
>> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan" <tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de>
>> Cc: "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com>, "postgres performance list" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
>> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 8:26:27 AM
>> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>>
>> On 19/09/14 17:53, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Mark Kirkwood" <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>
>>
>>>> Further to the confusion, here's my 9.3 vs 9.4 on two M550 (one for 9.3
>>>> one for 9.4), see below for results.
>>>>
>>>> I'm running xfs on them with trim/discard enabled:
>>>>
>>>> $ mount|grep pg
>>>> /dev/sdd4 on /mnt/pg94 type xfs (rw,discard)
>>>> /dev/sdc4 on /mnt/pg93 type xfs (rw,discard)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm *not* seeing any significant difference between 9.3 and 9.4, and the
>>>> numbers are both about 2x your best number, which is food for thought
>>>> (those P320's should toast my M550 for write performance...).
>>>
>>> cool! any details on OS and other options? I still get the same numbers
>>> as before.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, Ubuntu 14.04 on a single socket i7 3.4 Ghz, 16G (i.e my workstation).
>>
>> I saw the suggestion that Didier made to run 9.3 on the SSD that you
>> were using for 9.4, and see if it suddenly goes slow - then we'd know
>> it's something about the disk (or filesystem/mount options). Can you
>> test this?
>
>
> swapping the disks did not change the results.
>
>
Do you mean that 9.3 was still faster using the disk that 9.4 had used?
If so that strongly suggests that there is something you have configured
differently in the 9.4 installation [1]. Not wanting to sound mean - but
it is really easy to accidentally connect to the wrong instance when
there are two on the same box (ahem, yes , done it myself). So perhaps
another look at the 9.4 vs 9.3 setup (or even posti the config files
postgresql.conf + postgresql.auto.conf for 9.4 here).
Regards
Mark
[1] In the light of my previous test of (essentially) your config +
numerous other folk have been benchmarking 9.4.
--
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: mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz, tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de, mmoncure@gmail.com
Subject: Re: postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
In-Reply-To: <541CC338.5090700@catalyst.net.nz>
* 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