Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1693964FD22 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:38:00 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 60069-05 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:37:56 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from westnet.com (westnet.com [216.187.52.2]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78A1964FD2D for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:37:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from westnet.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by westnet.com (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id m9DLbsTf019119; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:37:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (gsmith@localhost) by westnet.com (8.14.0/8.13.2/Submit) with ESMTP id m9DLbrqG019115; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:37:54 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: westnet.com: gsmith owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:37:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Greg Smith X-X-Sender: gsmith@westnet.com To: Carlos Moreno cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: "Mysterious" issues with newly installed 8.3 In-Reply-To: <48F3615B.4050705@mochima.com> Message-ID: References: <48EE98FE.60100@mochima.com> <48F3615B.4050705@mochima.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200810/71 X-Sequence-Number: 31652 On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Carlos Moreno wrote: >> Another really handy way to gauge memory speed on Linux, if there are >> similar kernels installed on each system like your case, is to use >> "hdparm -T". > > Great tip! I was familiar with the -T switch, but was not clear on the > notion that the figure tells you that much about the overall memory > performance! I wouldn't go so far as to say it tells you *much* about it, but it does give a fairly useful comparison figure if the kernels are basically the same and can help spot gross errors. I used it a bunch when I was tinkering with DDR speeds and such earlier this year, it correlated fairly well with other memory bandwidth measurements within the same processor family (so far my tests suggestion results are much higher per clock on Intel CPUs). Certainly of no use for comparison if one system has a 32-bit kernel and the other 64, and results will vary depending on general kernel configuration (I get very different results from seemingly similar RedHat and Ubuntu kernels on the same system for example). It sounds like your CPU and memory setup are all fine, which leaves your mystery open. Please let us know if you find anything interesting out, normally an 8.3 upgrade would run faster so your situation is a bit curious. The only other benchmark I'd suggest just as a sanity check is bonnie++, that's a bit more thorough than what hdparm -t reports. -- * Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD