Yes, it's ext3.
On 6/4/10 7:24 PM, Jon Schewe wrote: > Which filesystem are you on too? I've found that ext3 is significantly > faster than ext4 and xfs. > > On 06/04/2010 04:01 PM, Stephen Thompson wrote: >> >> Thanks, yes it is Linux. I will look at those limits settings. >> And yes, I've built indexes and analyze (nothing to vacuum yet since >> it's a fresh import). >> >> Stephen >> >> On 06/04/2010 12:16 PM, Alan Brown wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Stephen Thompson wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Correction: >>>> I didn't notice the 8k per unit settings at first with postgres 8.1. >>>> Should read: >>>> effective_cache_size = 786432 # 6Gb >>>> >>> Assuming this is linux, you need to tweak /etc/sysctl/limits.conf a >>> little: >>> >>> postgres soft memlock unlimited >>> postgres hard memlock unlimited >>> @postgres hard memlock unlimited >>> @postgres soft memlock unlimited >>> bacula soft memlock unlimited >>> bacula hard memlock unlimited >>> @bacula soft memlock unlimited >>> @bacula hard memlock unlimited >>> >>> postgres soft rss unlimited >>> postgres hard rss unlimited >>> >>> >>> Don't forget to build the indexes and run analyse/vacuum commands. >>> >>> So far I'm finding Postgres is far more forgiving than MySQL and has far >>> fewer parts to tune... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On 06/04/2010 10:58 AM, Stephen Thompson wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>> >>>>> We recently attempted a mysql to postgresql migration for our bacula >>>>> 5.0.2 server. The data migration itself was successful, however we are >>>>> disappointly either getting the same or significantly worse performance >>>>> out of the postgres db. >>>>> >>>>> I was hoping that someone might have some insight into this. >>>>> >>>>> Here is some background: >>>>> >>>>> software: >>>>> centos 5.5 (64bit) >>>>> bacula 5.0.2 (64bit) >>>>> postgresql 8.1.21 (64bit) >>>>> (previously... mysql-5.0.77 (64bit) MyISAM) >>>>> >>>>> database: >>>>> select count(*) from File --> 1,439,626,558 >>>>> du -sk /var/lib/pgsql/data --> 346,236,136 /var/lib/pgsql/data >>>>> >>>>> hardware: >>>>> 1Tb EXT3 external fibre-RAID storage >>>>> 8Gb RAM >>>>> 2Gb SWAP >>>>> 2 dual-core [AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 2220] CPUs >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Some of the postgres tuning that I've attempted thus far (comments are >>>>> either default or alternatively settings I've tried without effect): >>>>> >>>>> #shared_buffers = 1000 # min 16 or max_connections*2, 8KB each >>>>> shared_buffers = 262144 # 2Gb >>>>> #work_mem = 1024 # min 64, size in KB >>>>> work_mem = 524288 # 512Mb >>>>> #maintenance_work_mem = 16384 # min 1024, size in KB >>>>> maintenance_work_mem = 2097152 # 2Gb >>>>> #checkpoint_segments = 3 # in logfile segments, min 1, 16MB each >>>>> checkpoint_segments = 16 >>>>> #checkpoint_warning = 30 # in seconds, 0 is off >>>>> checkpoint_warning = 16 >>>>> #effective_cache_size = 1000 # typically 8KB each >>>>> #effective_cache_size = 262144 # 256Mb >>>>> effective_cache_size = 6291456 # 6Gb >>>>> #random_page_cost = 4 # units are one sequential page fetch cost >>>>> random_page_cost = 2 >>>>> >>>>> Now, as to what I'm 'seeing'. Building restore trees are on par with my >>>>> previous mysql db, but what I'm seeing as significantly worse are: >>>>> >>>>> mysql postgresql >>>>> Within Bat: >>>>> 1) Version Browser (large sample job) 3min 9min >>>>> 2) Restore Tree (average sample job) 40sec 25sec >>>>> 3) Restore Tree (large sample job) 10min 8.5min >>>>> 2) Jobs Run (1000 Records) 10sec 2min >>>>> >>>>> Within psql/mysql: >>>>> 1) select count(*) from File; 1sec 30min >>>>> >>>>> Catalog dump: >>>>> 1) mysqldump/pgdump 2hrs 3hrs >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I get a win on building Restore trees, but everywhere else, it's >>>>> painfully slow. It makes the bat utility virtually unusable as an >>>>> interface. Why the win (albeit moderate) in some cases but terrible >>>>> responses in others? >>>>> >>>>> I admit that I am not familiar with postgres at all, but I tried to walk >>>>> through some of the postgres tuning documents, including the notes in >>>>> the bacula manual to arrive at the above settings. Also note that I've >>>>> tried several variants on the configuration above (including the >>>>> postgres defaults), don't have a detailed play by play of the results, >>>>> but the time results above seemed typical regardless of what settings I >>>>> tweaked. >>>>> >>>>> Any help would be greatly appreciated! >>>>> Stephen >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- Stephen Thompson Berkeley Seismological Laboratory step...@seismo.berkeley.edu 215 McCone Hall # 4760 404.538.7077 (phone) University of California, Berkeley 510.643.5811 (fax) Berkeley, CA 94720-4760 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
