Milen,
On 8/3/06 12:44 PM, "Milen Kulev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Luke,
> That is ~ 50% increase !! Amazing...
> How many reader processes did you have to get this results ?
Just one - I'll refresh the results sometime and post.
- Luke
---(end of broadcast)--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Denis Lussier") writes:
> I have no personal experience with XFS, but, I've seen numerous
> internal edb-postgres test results that show that of all file
> systems... OCFS 2.0 seems to be quite good for PG update intensive
> apps (especially on 64 bit machines).
I have been cur
No, this is a test server used for regression testing. Relatively
small (hundreds of GB) and quiet (dozen connections) in the Postgres
universe.
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 16:31 -0400, Chris Hoover wrote:
> Just curious, is this a production server? Also, how large is the
> total cluster on disk?
>
On 8/3/06, Luke Lonergan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Merlin,
> moving a gigabyte around/sec on the server, attached or no,
> is pretty heavy lifting on x86 hardware.
Maybe so, but we're doing 2GB/s plus on Sun/Thumper with software RAID
and 36 disks and 1GB/s on a HW RAID with 16 disks, all SA
Just curious, is this a production server? Also, how large is the total cluster on disk?On 8/3/06, Ian Westmacott <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:is that all? psql -l | grep 'rows)'(2016 rows)
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 21:15 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 01:33:35PM -0500, Jim
Title: Nachricht
Hi
Dennis,
I am
just cusrios to try PG with different block sizes ;) I don't
know how much performance the bigger block size will bring (I mean 32k
or 64k , for example, for DWH applikations).
I am
surprised to hear that OCFS2.0 (or any her FS usind direct I/O) performs
is that all?
psql -l | grep 'rows)'
(2016 rows)
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 21:15 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 01:33:35PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
> > I'm at a client who's an ASP; they've written their app such that each
> > customer gets their own database. Rigth now t
Hi Luke,
That is ~ 50% increase !! Amazing...
How many reader processes did you have to get this results ?
Regards. Milen
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Luke Lonergan
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 6:05 AM
To: Michael Stone; pgsql-perfo
I've got 226 customer databases in one cluster. Works like a champ with 8.1.3. I have 3 additional PostgreSQL servers with our largest customers on them. They have between 10 and 30 databases. The smallest of my servers has 261GB's worth of db's in the cluster, and the largest is 400GB's.
BTW,
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 01:33:35PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
> I'm at a client who's an ASP; they've written their app such that each
> customer gets their own database. Rigth now they're at nearly 200
> databases, and were thinking that they "must be the largest PostgreSQL
> install in the world". :
I'm at a client who's an ASP; they've written their app such that each
customer gets their own database. Rigth now they're at nearly 200
databases, and were thinking that they "must be the largest PostgreSQL
install in the world". :) After taking them down a notch or two, I
started wondering how m
Richard Rowell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We are using a BI tool that generates some rather ugly queries. One of
> the ugly queries is taking much longer to return thin I think it
> should.
> (http://www.bowmansystems.com/~richard/full.analyze)
> Can anyone shed any light on what is going on
unsubscribe
--
Wade Klaver
Wavefire Technologies Corporation
GPG Public Key at http://archeron.wavefire.com
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign .
\ / - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail .
X - NO Word docs in e-mail .
/ \ -
-
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 01:10:39AM -0600, Koth, Christian (DWBI) wrote:
For what reason are you planning to use a journaling FS? I think using WAL,
fsyncing every transaction and using a journaling FS is tautologous. And if you
have problems using EXT2 you can just add the journal later without
* Christian Koth:
> For what reason are you planning to use a journaling FS? I think
> using WAL, fsyncing every transaction and using a journaling FS is
> tautologous.
The journal is absolutely required to preserve the integrity of the
file system's own on-disk data structures after a crash. Ev
Milen,
> XFS, EXT3, JFS
For what reason are you planning to use a journaling FS? I think using WAL,
fsyncing every transaction and using a journaling FS is tautologous. And if you
have problems using EXT2 you can just add the journal later without loosing
data.
My tests using EXT2 showed a per
16 matches
Mail list logo
