User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 22:23:13 -0700
Subject: Re: Dell PowerEdge 2950 performance
From: "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan@greenplum.com>
To: "Bucky Jordan" <bjordan@lumeta.com>, "Vivek Khera" <vivek@khera.org>,
	"Pgsql-Performance ((E-mail))" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Message-ID: <C106A851.2E2DE%llonergan@greenplum.com>
Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] Dell PowerEdge 2950 performance
Thread-Index: Aca/6BSoubeH1essTG2W8Qsqr6hOVwAEMupgAAyBxX4=
In-Reply-To: <78ED28FACE63744386D68D8A9D1CF5D41049DB@MAIL.corp.lumeta.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bucky,

I see you are running bonnie++ version 1.93c. The numbers it reports are
very different from version 1.03a, which is the one everyone runs - can you
post your 1.03a numbers from bonnie++?

- Luke


On 8/14/06 4:38 PM, "Bucky Jordan" <bjordan@lumeta.com> wrote:

> ...
> Of more interest would be a test which involved large files with lots
> of seeks all around (something like bonnie++ should do that).
> ...
> 
> Here's the bonnie++ numbers for the RAID 5 x 6 disks. I believe this was
> with write-through and 64k striping. I plan to run a few others with
> different block sizes and larger files- I'd be happy to send out a link
> to the list when I get a chance to post them somewhere. I've also been
> running some basic tests with pgbench just to help jumpstart customizing
> postgresql.conf, so that might be of interest too.
> 
> bash-2.05b$ bonnie++ -d bonnie -s 1000:8k
> Version 1.93c       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
> --Random-
> Concurrency   1     -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
> --Seeks--
> Machine        Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
> /sec %CP
>              1000M   587  99 246900  71 225124  76  1000  99 585723  99
> 8573 955
> Latency             14367us   50829us     410ms   57965us    1656us
> 432ms
> Version 1.93c       ------Sequential Create------ --------Random
> Create--------
>                     -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
> -Delete--
>               files  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP  /sec %CP
> /sec %CP
>                  16 28192  91 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ 26076  89 +++++ +++
> +++++ +++
> Latency             25988us      75us      37us   24756us      36us
> 41us
> 1.93c,1.93c,
> ,1,1155223901,1000M,,587,99,246900,71,225124,76,1000,99,585723,99,8573,9
> 55,16,,,,,28192,91,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,26076,89,+++++,+++,+++++,+++,1436
> 7us,50829us,410ms,57965us,1656us,432ms,25988us,75us,37us,24756us,36us,41
> us
> 
> ...
> Thanks for sharing your numbers.
> ...
> 
> You're welcome- I prefer to see actual numbers rather than people simply
> stating that RAID controller X is better, so hopefully more people will
> do the same.
> 
> - Bucky
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>