Charles,
> FWIW, once our vendor gets all the pieces (having some issues
> with figuring out which multilane sata cables to get), I'll
> have a dual-core opteron box with a 3Ware 9500SX-12MI and 8
> drives. I need to benchmark to compare this to our
> xeon/adaptec/scsi build we've been using
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Mikael Carneholm wrote:
Luke,
Yeah, I read those results, and I'm very disappointed with my results
from the MSA1500. I would however be interested in other people's
bonnie++ and benchmarksql results using a similar machine (2 cpu dual
core opteron) with other "off the shel
Ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's volatile, but it will always return an integer.
If it's volatile then it can't be used for an index condition.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, t
A volatile function has may return a different result for each row;
think of the random() or nextval() functions for example. You wouldn't
want them to return the same value for each row returned.
-- Mark Lewis
On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 13:59 -0700, Ben wrote:
> It's volatile, but it will always ret
It's volatile, but it will always return an integer.
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Daniel Caune wrote:
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:pgsql-performance-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Ben
Envoyé : vendredi, juillet 28, 2006 15:21
À : pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Objet : [PERFORM] index usage
I hav
Jeff,
On 7/28/06 10:31 AM, "Jeff Trout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm still not sure about that software 10 read number. something is
> not right there...
It's very consistent with what we've seen before - the hardware RAID
controller doesn't do JBOD with SCSI command queuing like a simple SC
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:pgsql-performance-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Ben
> Envoyé : vendredi, juillet 28, 2006 15:21
> À : pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Objet : [PERFORM] index usage
>
> I have a table with 37000 rows, an integer column, and an index on that
> column. I've go
I have a table with 37000 rows, an integer column, and an index on that
column. I've got a function that returns an integer. When I do a select
where I restrict that column to being equal to a static number, explain
tells me the index will be used. When I do the same thing but use the
function
This isn't all that surprising. The main weaknesses of RAID-5 are poor
write performance and stupid hardware controllers that make the write
performance even worse than it needs to be. Your numbers bear that out.
Reads off RAID-5 are usually pretty good.
Your 'dd' test is going to be a little mi
Mikael Carneholm wrote:
I would be interested in what numbers you would get out of bonnie++
(http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++) and BenchmarkSQL
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/benchmarksql) on that hardware, for
comparison with our DL385 (2xOpteron 280, 16Gb ram) and MSA1500. If you
need help bu
I too have a DL385 with a single DC Opteron 270.
It claims to have a smart array 6i controller and over the last
couple of days I've been runnign some tests on it, which have been
yielding some suprising results.
I've got 6 10k U320 disks in it. 2 are in a mirror set. We'll not
pay any at
On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 20:25, carlosreimer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We've a fedora core 3 box with PostgreSQL 8.0.
>
> There is some performance problems with the server and I discovered
> with vmstat tool that there is some process writing a lot of
> information in the disk subsystem.
>
> I stopped t
As I have understood, there is alot of tuning using both postgres.conf and
analyzing queries to make the values of postgres.conf fit my needs, system
and hardware. This is where I need some help. I have looked into
postgres.conf , and seen the tunings. But I'm still not sure what I should
put into
Hello.
Unfortunately, I'm leaving for my vacation now, gone 3 weeks. When I'm
back I'll run benchmarksql and bonnie++ and give the results here.
The spec I will be using:
Prolite DL585
2 x AMD/Opteron 64-bit 2,6GHZ
8G DDR PC3200
4 x 150G SCSI in SmartArray 5i
Running Gentoo 2006.0 AMD_64 Hardene
Hi!thanks for the quick helpi managed to reduce the response time from seemingly taking infinity to a tolerable level, which is by the way a huge improvement. What helped was the functional index on date_trunc('day',yourfieldhere) as Scott suggested.
I tried to disable the geqo, but it didn't make
Luke,
Yeah, I read those results, and I'm very disappointed with my results
from the MSA1500. I would however be interested in other people's
bonnie++ and benchmarksql results using a similar machine (2 cpu dual
core opteron) with other "off the shelf" storage systems
(EMC/Netapp/Xyratex/../). Cou
Mikael,
> -Original Message-
> From: Mikael Carneholm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 2:05 AM
>
> My bonnie++ results are found in this message:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2006-07/msg00164.php
>
Apologies if I've already said this, but th
Mikael,
> -Original Message-
> From: Mikael Carneholm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 1:47 AM
>
> I would be interested in what numbers you would get out of bonnie++
> (http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++) and BenchmarkSQL
> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/benchmark
I would be interested in what numbers you would get out of bonnie++
(http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++) and BenchmarkSQL
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/benchmarksql) on that hardware, for
comparison with our DL385 (2xOpteron 280, 16Gb ram) and MSA1500. If you
need help building benchmarksql, I can
Kjell,
> I got 4 150GIG SCSI disks in a Smart Array 5i 1+0 RAID.
The Smart Array 5i is a terrible performer on Linux. I would be
surprised if you exceed the performance of a single hard drive with this
controller when doing I/O from disk. Since your database working set is
larger than memory on
20 matches
Mail list logo
