DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
	h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
	b=L4TVgV9rP8fiocoQAv/EPG6AsQr9pqx58I0FQrnJz0FPVcf5AYBNDQTtmTnPk47Z61DS0npX6JiTvgR9fZixyZ/XbBJIjZWqH3pr0MXklhybA5dLO7Myfh37cmPGT1+G+TXNkfuiL9nFoxS/tv3h8kUxjXCSKD7rtch6IYr0KYY=
Message-ID: <758d5e7f05071401034665841c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:03:10 +0200
From: Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42@gmail.com>
To: "Jeffrey W. Baker" <jwbaker@acm.org>
Subject: Re: JFS fastest filesystem for PostgreSQL?
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <1121322821.6719.0.camel@noodles>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <1121322821.6719.0.camel@noodles>

On 7/14/05, Jeffrey W. Baker <jwbaker@acm.org> wrote:
> [reposted due to delivery error -jwb]
>=20
> I just took delivery of a new system, and used the opportunity to
> benchmark postgresql 8.0 performance on various filesystems.  The system
> in question runs Linux 2.6.12, has one CPU and 1GB of system memory, and
> 5 7200RPM SATA disks attached to an Areca hardware RAID controller
> having 128MB of cache.  The caches are all write-back.
>=20
> I ran pgbench with a scale factor of 1000 and a total of 100,000
> transactions per run.  I varied the number of clients between 10 and
> 100.  It appears from my test JFS is much faster than both ext3 and XFS
> for this workload.  JFS and XFS were made with the mkfs defaults.  ext3
> was made with -T largefile4 and -E stride=3D32.  The deadline scheduler
> was used for all runs (anticipatory scheduler is much worse).
>=20
> Here's the result, in transactions per second.
>=20
>               ext3  jfs  xfs
> -----------------------------
>  10 Clients     55   81   68
> 100 Clients     61  100   64
> ----------------------------

If you still have a chance, could you do tests with other journaling
options for ext3 (journal=3Dwriteback, journal=3Ddata)?  And could you
give figures about performace of other IO elevators?  I mean, you
wrote that anticipatory is much wore -- how much worse? :)  Could
you give numbers for deadline,anticipatory,cfq elevators? :)

And, additionally would it be possible to give numbers for bonnie++
results?  To see how does pgbench to bonnie++ relate?

   Regards,
        Dawid