X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C280535BB for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 21:46:31 +0100 (BST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 39154-09 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 20:46:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.202]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA6C53396 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 21:46:29 +0100 (BST) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so1063219wri for ; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 13:46:32 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=XB3XPSf1gftTjqygTCciM/uas3AgB0oi0ir3vwwNp16cMNjxdiEnkUJIF25o+4CWTNYnd9LMvzAoF1TDgjrMKWR63bCZDg1Jsybwt+A47lfO5SVEjuwNmn1ow/z4lMDgF6mv0OQKbAk+AgMQE0fAaMXWVx41zt/RQ4R4xG5IDOE= Received: by 10.54.15.51 with SMTP id 51mr27433wro; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 13:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.70.11 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 13:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <762e5c050408134658d594fa@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 15:46:32 -0500 From: Bob Henkel Reply-To: Bob Henkel To: Scott Marlowe Subject: Re: getting count for a specific querry Cc: Vivek Khera , pgsql-sql@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <1112992921.20921.84.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_26214_9692910.1112993192079" References: <003b01c53c70$6ff184b0$797ba8c0@jfradkin> <762e5c05040813354436bd27@mail.gmail.com> <1112992921.20921.84.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.216 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, HTML_40_50, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_BY_IP X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200504/126 X-Sequence-Number: 21019 ------=_Part_26214_9692910.1112993192079 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Apr 8, 2005 3:42 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:= =20 >=20 > On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 15:35, Bob Henkel wrote: > > On Apr 8, 2005 3:23 PM, Vivek Khera wrote: > > On Apr 8, 2005, at 3:23 PM, Joel Fradkin wrote: > > > > > I set up the data on 4 10k scsi drives in a powervault and > > my wal on 2 > > > 15k > > > drives. I am using links to those from the install > > directory. It > > > starts and > > > stops ok this way, but maybe it should be different. > > > > > > > Your problem might just be the choice of using a Dell RAID > > controller. > > I have a 1 year old box connected to a 14 disk powervault > > (PowerEdge > > 2650) and it is dog slow compared to a dual opteron with 8 > > disks that > > is replacing it. It is all I/O for me, and the dell's just > > are not > > known for speedy I/O. > > > > Vivek Khera, Ph.D. > > +1-301-869-4449 x806 > > > > > > > > But that is relative I would think. Is the Dell RAID much faster than > > my desktop SATA drive with no RAID? I'm by any means as knowledgeable > > about I/O setup as many of you are but my 2 cents wonders if the Dell > > RAID is really that much slower than a competitively priced/speced > > alternative? Would Joel's problems just fade away if he wasn't using > > a Dell RAID? >=20 > My experience with the 3i controllers (See my earlier post) was that my > old Pentium Pro200x2 machine with 512 meg ram and a generic Ultra Wide > SCSI card and a half dozen drives running software RAID 5 was faster. >=20 > Seriously. So was my P-II-350 desktop with the same controller, and an > older Dual P-III-750 with only UltraSCSI running in a RAID-1 mirror set. >=20 > The 3I is REALLY slow (or at least WAS slow) under linux. >=20 Interesting... Maybe Joel after a weekend of rest can try it on a different= =20 setup even if that different setup is just a power users development machin= e=20 to see if he has same or worse timing results. Be wonderful if it magically= =20 sped up. ------=_Part_26214_9692910.1112993192079 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
On Apr 8, 2005 3:42 PM, Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 15:35, Bob= Henkel wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2005 3:23 PM, Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org> wrote:
>  &n= bsp;      On Apr 8, 2005, at 3:23 PM, Joel Fradkin= wrote:
>
>         >= ; I set up the data on 4 10k scsi drives in a powervault and
> &= nbsp;       my wal on 2
>  &n= bsp;      > 15k
>    =      > drives. I am using links to those from the in= stall
>         directory. It=
>         > starts and>         > stops ok this wa= y, but maybe it should be different.
>     &= nbsp;   >
>
>      &= nbsp;  Your problem might just be the choice of using a Dell RAID
&= gt;         controller.
>&nbs= p;        I have a 1 year old box connec= ted to a 14 disk powervault
>      &nbs= p;  (PowerEdge
>        = 2650) and it is dog slow compared to a dual opteron with 8
> &n= bsp;       disks that
>  &nbs= p;      is replacing it.  It is all I/O = for me, and the dell's just
>      &nbs= p;  are not
>         kn= own for speedy I/O.
>
>      &nbs= p;  Vivek Khera, Ph.D.
>      &nbs= p;  +1-301-869-4449 x806
>
>
>
> But that is r= elative I would think.  Is the Dell RAID much faster than
>= my desktop SATA drive with no RAID? I'm by any means as knowledgeable
&= gt; about I/O setup as many of you are but my 2 cents wonders if the Dell> RAID is really that much slower than a competitively priced/speced> alternative?  Would Joel's problems just fade away if he w= asn't using
> a Dell RAID?

My experience with the 3i controlle= rs (See my earlier post) was that my
old Pentium Pro200x2 machine with 5= 12 meg ram and a generic Ultra Wide
SCSI card and a half dozen drives ru= nning software RAID 5 was faster.

Seriously.  So was my P-= II-350 desktop with the same controller, and an
older Dual P-III-750 wit= h only UltraSCSI running in a RAID-1 mirror set.

The 3I is REALLY sl= ow (or at least WAS slow) under linux.

Interesting...  Maybe Joel after a weekend of rest can t= ry it on a different setup even if that different setup is just a power use= rs development machine to see if he has same or worse timing results. = Be wonderful if it magically sped  up.
 
------=_Part_26214_9692910.1112993192079--