X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187689FB2AF for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2006 13:23:31 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 72747-04 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2006 16:23:23 +0000 (UTC) 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 4706A9FB274 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2006 13:23:23 -0300 (ADT) Received: from 172.16.1.148 by mail.mi8.com with ESMTP (- Welcome to Mi8 Corporation www.Mi8.com (D2)); Tue, 08 Aug 2006 12:23:14 -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); Tue, 8 Aug 2006 12:22:18 -0400 Received: from 63.80.24.130 ([63.80.24.130]) by MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com ( [172.16.1.219]) via Exchange Front-End Server mi8owa.mi8.com ( [172.16.1.134]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 8 Aug 2006 16:22:17 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620 Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 09:22:15 -0700 Subject: Re: Postgresql Performance on an HP DL385 and From: "Luke Lonergan" To: "Steve Poe" cc: "Alex Turner" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] Postgresql Performance on an HP DL385 and Thread-Index: Aca7Bs9fDhM4vSb6EduxKgAWy4o9DA== In-Reply-To: <721b21dc0608080801l5fb6534ey7094774ff79a323b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Aug 2006 16:22:18.0009 (UTC) FILETIME=[D12AF890:01C6BB06] X-WSS-ID: 68C665FB3785890157-02-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200608/104 X-Sequence-Number: 20289 Steve, On 8/8/06 8:01 AM, "Steve Poe" wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. I use the same database test that I've run a Sun > dual Opteron with 4Gb RAM and (2) four disk arrays in RAID10. The sun box with > one disc on an LSI MegaRAID 2-channel adapter outperforms this HP box. I > though I was doing something wrong or there is something wrong with the box. Given the circumstances (benchmarked I/O is great, comparable perf on another box with single disk is better), seems that one of: 1) something wrong with the CPU/memory on the box 2) something with the OS version / kernel 3) something with the postgres configuration Can you post the database benchmark results? - Luke