Hi,
I have a 8 GB database, and 2 GB table. In a query i use the 2 GB table and
several other tables where it takes around 90 minutes for execution.
In different places, it takes drastically different time. Say everywhere i
have the same,
OS - Debian.
Primary memory - 3 GB
PostgreSQL configuratio
El Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:54:58 -0500
Robert Haas escribió:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Jonah H. Harris
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Merlin Moncure
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> ISTM you are the one throwing out unsubstantiated assertions
> >> without data to back it up. OP ran ben
El Fri, 20 Feb 2009 14:48:06 -0500
"Jonah H. Harris" escribió:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Sergio Lopez
> wrote:
>
> Having this said, the benchmark is not as unfair as you thought. I've
> > taken care to prepare all databases to meet similar values for their
> > cache, buffers and I/O co
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:14 AM, marcin mank wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:56 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
> wrote:
>> Just as a question to Tom and team,
>
> maybe it`s time for asktom.postgresql.org? Oracle has it :)
+1
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgres
Robert Haas wrote:
The biggest flaw in the benchmark by far has got to be that it was
done with a ramdisk, so it's really only measuring CPU consumption.
Measuring CPU consumption is interesting, but it doesn't have a lot to
do with throughput in real-life situations.
... and memory access
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Jonah H. Harris
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>>
>>> ISTM you are the one throwing out unsubstantiated assertions without
>>> data to back it up. OP ran benchmark. showe
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Battle Mage wrote:
> I have a server box that has 4GB of RAM, Quad core CPU AMD Opteron 200.152
> Mhz (1024 KB cache size each) with plenty of hard drive space.
>
> I installed both postgresql 8.2.6 and 8.3.3 on it. I've created a basic
> test db and used
> pgbenc
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>
>> ISTM you are the one throwing out unsubstantiated assertions without
>> data to back it up. OP ran benchmark. showed hardware/configs, and
>> demonstrated result. He was carefu
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Battle Mage wrote:
> The amount of tps almost doubled, which is good, but i'm worried about the
> load. For my application, a load increase is bad and I'd like to keep it
> just like in 8.2.6 (a load average between 3.4 and 4.3). What parameters
> should I work w
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 04:34:23PM -0500, Battle Mage wrote:
> I have a server box that has 4GB of RAM, Quad core CPU AMD Opteron 200.152
> Mhz (1024 KB cache size each) with plenty of hard drive space.
>
> I installed both postgresql 8.2.6 and 8.3.3 on it. I've created a basic
> test db and used
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> ISTM you are the one throwing out unsubstantiated assertions without
> data to back it up. OP ran benchmark. showed hardware/configs, and
> demonstrated result. He was careful to hedge expectations and gave
> rationale for his analysis me
I have a server box that has 4GB of RAM, Quad core CPU AMD Opteron 200.152
Mhz (1024 KB cache size each) with plenty of hard drive space.
I installed both postgresql 8.2.6 and 8.3.3 on it. I've created a basic
test db and used
pgbench -i -s 1 -U test -h localhost test
to create a sample test db.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Sergio Lopez
> wrote:
>>
>> On the other hand, I've neved said that what I've done is the
>> Perfect-Marvelous-Definitive Benchmark, it's just a personal project,
>> and I don't have an infinite amount of t
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> Having this said, the benchmark is not as unfair as you thought. I've
>> taken care to prepare all databases to meet similar values for their
>> cache, buffers and I/O configuration (to what's possible given their
>> differences), and the I
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > First of all, you need to do some research on the benchmark kit itself,
> > rather than blindly downloading and using one. BenchmarkSQL has
> significant
> > bugs in it which affect the result. I can say that authoritatively as I
> > worke
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Sergio Lopez wrote:
> On the other hand, I've neved said that what I've done is the
> Perfect-Marvelous-Definitive Benchmark, it's just a personal project,
> and I don't have an infinite amount of time to invest on it.
When you make comments such as "As for datab
> First of all, you need to do some research on the benchmark kit itself,
> rather than blindly downloading and using one. BenchmarkSQL has significant
> bugs in it which affect the result. I can say that authoritatively as I
> worked on/with it for quite awhile. Don't trust any result that come
El Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:39:41 -0500
"Jonah H. Harris" escribió:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Sergio Lopez
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under
> > three environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as
> > GNU/Linux) and Sola
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Sergio Lopez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under three
> environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as GNU/Linux) and
> Solaris-SPARC. I think you might find it interesting:
>
>
> http://blogs.nologin.es/s
El Fri, 20 Feb 2009 08:36:44 -0800
Alan Hodgson escribió:
> On Friday 20 February 2009, Sergio Lopez
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under
> > three environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as
> > GNU/Linux) and Solaris-SPARC. I
On Friday 20 February 2009, Sergio Lopez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under three
> environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as GNU/Linux) and
> Solaris-SPARC. I think you might find it interesting:
>
> http://blogs.nologin.es/slopez/a
Hi,
I've made a benchmark comparing PostgreSQL, MySQL and Oracle under three
environments: GNU/Linux-x86, Solaris-x86 (same machine as GNU/Linux) and
Solaris-SPARC. I think you might find it interesting:
http://blogs.nologin.es/slopez/archives/17-Benchmarking-Databases-I.-Volatile-Storage..html
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> =?UTF-8?Q?Grzegorz_Ja=C5=9Bkiewicz?= writes:
>> I mean query like:
>> select id from foo where id not in ( select id from bar);
>> into:
>> select f.id from foo f left join bar b on f.id=b.id where b.id is null;
>
> Postgres does not do that, bec
=?UTF-8?Q?Grzegorz_Ja=C5=9Bkiewicz?= writes:
> I mean query like:
> select id from foo where id not in ( select id from bar);
> into:
> select f.id from foo f left join bar b on f.id=b.id where b.id is null;
Postgres does not do that, because they don't mean the same thing ---
the behavior for NU
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009, Scott Carey wrote:
For anyone worried about the X 25–M’s ability to withstand lots of write
cycles ... Calculate how long it would take you to write 800TB to the
drive at a typical rate. For most use cases that’s going to be > 5
years. For the 160GB version, it will take
> Just as a question to Tom and team,
maybe it`s time for asktom.postgresql.org? Oracle has it :)
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:14 AM, marcin mank wrote:
>> Just as a question to Tom and team,
>
> maybe it`s time for asktom.postgresql.org? Oracle has it :)
hehe,
on the other hand - that would make my ppl here very skilfull, the
only reason I started to praise them about joins, and stuff - is
be
Just as a question to Tom and team,
I saw a post a bit ago, about plans for 8.4, and Tom said it is very
likely that 8.4 will rewrite subselects into left joins, is it still
in plans?
I mean query like:
select id from foo where id not in ( select id from bar);
into:
select f.id from foo f left jo
28 matches
Mail list logo
