X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 356DFD8411 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 14:20:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 80840-06 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 17:20:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.Mi8.com (d01gw01.mi8.com [63.240.6.47]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA355D7D16 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 14:20:03 -0300 (ADT) Received: from 172.16.1.110 by mail.Mi8.com with ESMTP (- Welcome to Mi8 Corporation www.Mi8.com (D1)); Sun, 04 Sep 2005 13:19:55 -0400 X-Server-Uuid: 241911D6-425B-44B9-A073-E3FE0F8FC774 Received: from MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com ([172.16.1.174]) by D01SMTP01.Mi8.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Sun, 4 Sep 2005 13:19:55 -0400 Received: from 24.5.173.15 ([24.5.173.15]) by MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com ( [172.16.1.219]) via Exchange Front-End Server mi8owa.mi8.com ( [172.16.1.104]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 13:19:54 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.1.0.040913 Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 10:19:53 -0700 Subject: Re: Poor performance on HP Package Cluster From: "Luke Lonergan" To: "Ernst Einstein" Cc: "Dan Harris" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1125848875.6873.10.camel@Dellerium.party.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Sep 2005 17:19:55.0150 (UTC) FILETIME=[DE2952E0:01C5B174] X-WSS-ID: 6F05F3310TK3908504-01-01 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=B_3208673994_10704975 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.84 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.246, FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.05, HTML_20_30=0.504, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.531] X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200509/70 X-Sequence-Number: 14378 > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3208673994_10704975 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sure =AD I posted the excel spreadsheet to the list right after my message, but I think it blocks attachments. I=B9ll send it to you now privately. I recommend switching to software RAID 10 or 5 using simple SCSI U320 adapter(s) from LSI or Adaptec, which you can buy from HP if you must. Cheers, - Luke=20 On 9/4/05 8:47 AM, "Ernst Einstein" wrote: > Hi ! >=20 > Sorry, for my late answer. I was unavailable for a few days... >=20 > Yes, I'm using the build-in HP Smart Array Controller. Both, the internal > disks, and the external storrage are using the controller. >=20 > Can you send me your test results? I'm interested in it. >=20 > I've done some testing now. I've imported the data again and tuned the DB= like > I was told in some performance howtos. Now, the database has a good > performance - until it has to read from the disks. >=20 > Greetings Ernst >=20 >=20 > Am Donnerstag, den 01.09.2005, 21:54 -0700 schrieb Luke Lonergan: >>=20 >> Dan, >>=20 >> On 9/1/05 4:02 PM, "Dan Harris" wrote: >>=20 >>> > Do you have any sources for that information? I am running dual >>> > SmartArray 6402's in my DL585 and haven't noticed anything poor about >>> > their performance. >>=20 >> I've previously posted comprehensive results using the 5i and 6xxx serie= s >> smart arrays using software RAID, HW RAID on 3 different kernels, alongs= ide >> LSI and Adaptec SCSI controllers, and an Adaptec 24xx HW RAID adapter. >> Results with bonnie++ and simple sequential read/write with dd. >>=20 >> I'll post them again here for reference in the next message. Yes, the >> performance of the SmartArray controllers under Linux was abysmal, even = when >> run by the labs at HP. >>=20 >> - Luke >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate >> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your >> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly --B_3208673994_10704975 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [PERFORM] Poor performance on HP Package Cluster Sure = – I posted the excel spreadsheet to the list right after my message, b= ut I think it blocks attachments.  I’ll send it to you now privat= ely.

I recommend switching to software RAID 10 or 5 using simple SCSI U320 adapt= er(s) from LSI or Adaptec, which you can buy from HP if you must.

Cheers,

- Luke


On 9/4/05 8:47 AM, "Ernst Einstein" <Crusader@gmx.ch> wrote= :

Hi !

Sorry, for my late answer. I was unavailable for a few days...

Yes, I'm using the build-in HP Smart Array Controller. Both, the internal d= isks, and the external storrage are using the controller.

Can you send me your test results? I'm interested in it.

I've done some testing now. I've imported the data again and tuned the DB l= ike I was told in some performance howtos. Now, the database has a good perf= ormance - until it has to read from the disks.

Greetings Ernst


Am Donnerstag, den 01.09.2005, 21:54 -0700 schrieb Luke Lonergan:

Dan,

On 9/1/05 4:02 PM, "Dan Harris" <fbsd@drivefaster.net> wrot= e:

> Do you have any sources for that information?  I am running dual<= BR> > SmartArray 6402's in my DL585 and haven't noticed anything poor about<= BR> > their performance.

I've previously posted comprehensive results using the 5i and 6xxx series smart arrays using software RAID, HW RAID on 3 different kernels, alongside=
LSI and Adaptec SCSI controllers, and an Adaptec 24xx HW RAID adapter.
Results with bonnie++ and simple sequential read/write with dd.

I'll post them again here for reference in the next message.  Yes, the=
performance of the SmartArray controllers under Linux was abysmal, even whe= n
run by the labs at HP.

- Luke



---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to major= domo@postgresql.org so that your
       message can get through to the ma= iling list cleanly

 --B_3208673994_10704975--