Message-ID: <5422971C.3090501@catalyst.net.nz>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 22:04:12 +1200
From: Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Mkrtchyan, Tigran" <tigran.mkrtchyan@desy.de>,
 Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
CC: postgres performance list <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
References: <45142416.42827.1411033201079.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
 <753223953.46319.1411106018106.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
 <541BCC93.9070204@catalyst.net.nz>
 <212134052.46894.1411111441514.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
 <541CC338.5090700@catalyst.net.nz>
 <CAHyXU0zj8P41G-5QpL2Lz-DYLtfsqQP3TbR3pLTFhUUuYg8ekQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1234976322.60875.1411477085811.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
 <CAHyXU0yOfJ1mj2W0mBd==-hO260g8vtC7=-ptORnR2pfymShyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1160757821.126570.1411550628851.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
In-Reply-To: <1160757821.126570.1411550628851.JavaMail.zimbra@desy.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

On 24/09/14 21:23, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
> Hi Merlin et al.
>
> after building postgres 9.4 myself from sources I get the same performance as
> with 9.3. The difference was in the value of debug_assertions setting.
>
> Now the next step. Why my 3 years old laptop gets x1.8 times more tps than my one month old server?
> And Mark Kirkwood's desktop gets x2 times more tps as well? Is there some special optimization
> for i7 which does not work with Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2660?
>
>

Yes - firstly, nicely done re finding the assertions (my 9.4 beta2 was 
built from src - never thought to mention sorry)!

I'd guess that you are seeing some bios setting re the p320 SSD - it 
*should* be seriously fast...but does not seem to be. You could try 
running some pure IO benchmarks to confirm this (e.g fio). Also see if 
the manual for however it is attached to the system allows for some 
optimized-for-ssd settings that tend to work better (altho these usually 
imply the drive is plugged into an adapter card of some kind - mind you 
your p320 *does* used a custom connector that does 2.5" SATA to PCIe 
style interconnect so I'd look to debug that first).

Cheers

Mark


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance