Re: [PERFORM] Easy read-heavy benchmark kicking around?

2006-11-08 Thread Luke Lonergan
Similar experiences with HP and their SmartArray 5i controller on Linux. The answer was: "this controller has won awards for performance! It can't be slow!", so we made them test it in their own labs an prove just how awfully slow it was. In the case of the 5i, it became apparent that HP had no in

Re: [PERFORM] Which OS provides the _fastest_ PostgreSQL performance?

2006-11-08 Thread Ron Mayer
Jean-David Beyer wrote: > > Sure, some even read the entire cylinder. But unless the data are stored > contiguously, this does little good. The Linux ext2 and ext3 file systems > try to get more contiguity by allocating (IIRC) 8 blocks each time a write > needs space >From where do you recall thi

Re: [PERFORM] Easy read-heavy benchmark kicking around?

2006-11-08 Thread Cosimo Streppone
Merlin Moncure wrote: On 11/8/06, Markus Schaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Brian, Brian Hurt wrote: > So the question is: is there an easy to install and run, read-heavy > benchmark out there that I can wave at them to get them to fix the > problem? For sequential read performance, use

Re: [PERFORM] Easy read-heavy benchmark kicking around?

2006-11-08 Thread Merlin Moncure
On 11/8/06, Markus Schaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Brian, Brian Hurt wrote: > So the question is: is there an easy to install and run, read-heavy > benchmark out there that I can wave at them to get them to fix the > problem? For sequential read performance, use dd. Most variants of dd

Re: [PERFORM] Easy read-heavy benchmark kicking around?

2006-11-08 Thread Markus Schaber
Hi, Brian, Brian Hurt wrote: > So the question is: is there an easy to install and run, read-heavy > benchmark out there that I can wave at them to get them to fix the > problem? For sequential read performance, use dd. Most variants of dd I've seen output some timing information, and if not, do