X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A11149DC81E for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:37:41 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 51252-03 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:37:45 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mail.mi8.com (d01gw04.mi8.com [63.240.6.44]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44E5E9DC813 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:37:39 -0400 (AST) Received: from 172.16.1.148 by mail.mi8.com with ESMTP (- Welcome to Mi8 Corporation www.Mi8.com (D4)); Mon, 19 Dec 2005 20:37:36 -0500 X-Server-Uuid: C8FB4D43-1108-484A-A898-3CBCC7906230 Received: from MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com ([172.16.1.175]) by D01HOST02.Mi8.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 19 Dec 2005 20:37:36 -0500 Received: from 67.103.45.218 ([67.103.45.218]) by MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com ( [172.16.1.219]) via Exchange Front-End Server mi8owa.mi8.com ( [172.16.1.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 01:37:35 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.1.051004 Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 17:37:35 -0800 Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Ultrasparc T1 From: "Luke Lonergan" To: "Jignesh Shah" cc: "Juan Casero" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] PostgreSQL and Ultrasparc T1 Thread-Index: AcYE2cfZIe1w3tZWSUitym8yVww/KwALCv06 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Dec 2005 01:37:36.0012 (UTC) FILETIME=[F468C4C0:01C60505] X-WSS-ID: 6FB9BFEA3ZO7532483-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.265 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.012, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.253] X-Spam-Score: 1.265 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200512/470 X-Sequence-Number: 16291 Jignesh, On 12/19/05 12:21 PM, "Jignesh Shah" wrote: > extended device statistics > r/s w/s Mr/s Mw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device > 0.8 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 17.8 0 4 c3t0d0 > 91.4 0.0 91.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 10.5 0 96 c0t40d0 > 96.0 0.0 96.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 10.0 0 96 c5t40d1 > 95.8 0.0 95.8 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 10.0 0 96 c0t40d1 > 96.8 0.0 96.8 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 9.9 0 96 c5t40d0 > 84.6 0.0 84.6 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 11.4 0 96 c4t46d1 > 85.6 0.0 85.6 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 11.2 0 96 c4t46d0 > 85.2 0.0 85.2 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 11.3 0 96 c2t46d1 > 85.4 0.0 85.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 11.3 0 96 c2t46d0 Doh! Forget my last message, each of these is a single drive. Wacky layout though - it looks like c0,c2,c3,c4,c5 - is that 5 controllers there? Also - what are the RAID options on this unit? To get optimal performance on an 8 core unit, would we want to map 1 active process to each of these drives? Can the CPU run all 8 threads simultaneously? - Luke