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 CFDA311F662B for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 18:56:54 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16463-04 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 18:56:54 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mail.mi8.com (d01gw02.mi8.com [63.240.6.46]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95A2E11F6621 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 18:56:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from 172.16.1.148 by mail.mi8.com with ESMTP (- Welcome to Mi8 Corporation www.Mi8.com (D2)); Wed, 05 Apr 2006 17:56:43 -0400 X-Server-Uuid: 7829E76E-BB9E-4995-8473-3C0929DF7DD1 Received: from MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com ([172.16.1.160]) by D01HOST02.Mi8.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 5 Apr 2006 17:56:42 -0400 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 ; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 21:56:42 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.3.060209 Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 14:56:40 -0700 Subject: Re: bad performance on Solaris 10 From: "Luke Lonergan" To: "Alvaro Herrera" cc: "Chris Mair" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, markir@paradise.net.nz, "Josh Berkus" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] bad performance on Solaris 10 Thread-Index: AcZY+rMPuviuQTXWSlCsqJfrhcTJsgAAR5Yd In-Reply-To: <20060405214824.GB13673@surnet.cl> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Apr 2006 21:56:42.0817 (UTC) FILETIME=[D316F310:01C658FB] X-WSS-ID: 682AE2912XS40481941-01-01 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=1.347 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.094, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.253] X-Spam-Score: 1.347 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200604/70 X-Sequence-Number: 18154 Alvaro, On 4/5/06 2:48 PM, "Alvaro Herrera" wrote: > This essentially means stopping all bgwriter activity, thereby deferring > all I/O until checkpoint. Was this considered? With > checkpoint_segments to 128, it wouldn't surprise me that there wasn't > any checkpoint executed at all during the whole test ... Yes, many things about the Solaris UFS filesystem caused a great deal of pain over the 10 months of experiments we ran with Sun MDE. Ultimately, the conclusion was that ZFS is going to make all of the pain go away. In the meantime, all you can do is tweak up UFS and avoid I/O as much as possible. - Luke