Dear all,
Just letting you know that making the autovacuum policy more aggressive seems
to have fixed the problem.
It's been 4 days now and everything is running smoothly.
Just a reminder, what I changed was :
autovacuum_vacuum_scale_factor = 0.01
autovacuum_analyze_scale_factor = 0.005
making a
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:28 PM, David Boreham wrote:
> On 9/27/2012 3:16 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
>>
>> Careful with AMD, since many (I'm not sure about the latest ones)
>> cannot saturate the memory bus when running single-threaded. So, great
>> if you have a high concurrent workload, quite bad
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 04:39 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> Clarification that the two base machines were about the same price.
>> 48 opteron cores (2.2GHz) or 16 xeon cores at ~2.6GHz. It's been a
>> few years, I'm not gonna testify to the exact numbe
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Evgeny Shishkin wrote:
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:36 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Claudio Freire
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:08 PM, David Boreham
>>> wrote:
>
> We went from Dunnington to Nehalem, and it was
On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:36 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Claudio Freire
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:08 PM, David Boreham
>> wrote:
We went from Dunnington to Nehalem, and it was stunning how much better
the X5675 was compared to the E7450
On 09/27/2012 04:39 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
Clarification that the two base machines were about the same price.
48 opteron cores (2.2GHz) or 16 xeon cores at ~2.6GHz. It's been a
few years, I'm not gonna testify to the exact numbers in court.
Same here. We got really good performance on Opte
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Conversely, we often got MUCH better parallel performance from our
> quad 12 core opteron servers than I could get on a dual 8 core xeon at
> the time.
Clarification that the two base machines were about the same price.
48 opteron cores (2.2
On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:20 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 04:08 PM, Evgeny Shishkin wrote:
>
>> from benchmarking on my r/o in memory database, i can tell that 9.1
>> on x5650 is faster than 9.2 on e2440.
>
> How did you run those benchmarks? I find that incredibly hard to believe. Not
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:08 PM, David Boreham wrote:
>>>
>>> We went from Dunnington to Nehalem, and it was stunning how much better
>>> the X5675 was compared to the E7450. Sandy Bridge isn't quite that much of a
>>> jump though, so if yo
Please don't take responses off list, someone else may have an insight I'd miss.
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:20 PM, M. D. wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 02:55 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:46 PM, M. D. wrote:
>>>
>>> select item.item_id,item_plu.number,item.description,
>>> (sel
On 9/27/2012 3:16 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
Careful with AMD, since many (I'm not sure about the latest ones)
cannot saturate the memory bus when running single-threaded. So, great
if you have a high concurrent workload, quite bad if you don't.
Actually we test memory bandwidth with John McCalp
On 09/27/2012 02:55 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:46 PM, M. D. wrote:
select item.item_id,item_plu.number,item.description,
(select number from account where asset_acct = account_id),
(select number from account where expense_acct = account_id),
(select number from account
On 09/27/2012 04:08 PM, Evgeny Shishkin wrote:
from benchmarking on my r/o in memory database, i can tell that 9.1
on x5650 is faster than 9.2 on e2440.
How did you run those benchmarks? I find that incredibly hard to
believe. Not only does 9.2 scale *much* better than 9.1, but the E5-2440
i
On Thursday, September 27, 2012 03:04:51 PM David Boreham wrote:
> On 9/27/2012 2:55 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > Whatever you do, go for the Intel ethernet adaptor option. We've had so
> > many>
> > >headaches with integrated broadcom NICs.:(
>
> Sound advice, but not a get out of jail card unfo
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 03:44 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> This 100x this. We used to buy our boxes from aberdeeninc.com and got
>> a 5 year replacement parts warranty included. We spent ~$10k on a
>> server that was right around $18k from dell for t
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:08 PM, David Boreham wrote:
>>
>> We went from Dunnington to Nehalem, and it was stunning how much better
>> the X5675 was compared to the E7450. Sandy Bridge isn't quite that much of a
>> jump though, so if you don't need that kind of bleeding-edge, you might be
>> able
Hello,
from benchmarking on my r/o in memory database, i can tell that 9.1 on x5650 is
faster than 9.2 on e2440.
I do not have x5690, but i have not so loaded e2660.
If you can give me a dump and some queries, i can bench them.
Nevertheless x5690 seems more efficient on single threaded workloa
On 9/27/2012 2:47 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
On 09/27/2012 02:40 PM, David Boreham wrote:
I think the newer CPU is the clear winner with a specintrate
performance of 589 vs 432.
The comparisons you linked to had 24 absolute threads pitted against
32, since the newer CPUs have a higher maximum c
On 9/27/2012 2:55 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
Whatever you do, go for the Intel ethernet adaptor option. We've had so many
>headaches with integrated broadcom NICs.:(
Sound advice, but not a get out of jail card unfortunately : we had a
horrible problem with the Intel e1000 driver in RHEL for sever
On 09/27/2012 03:55 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
Have you tried re-writing this query first? Is there a reason to have
a bunch of subselects instead of joining the tables? What pg version
are you running btw? A newer version of pg might help too.
Wow, yeah. I was just about to say something abo
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:46 PM, M. D. wrote:
>
> select item.item_id,item_plu.number,item.description,
> (select number from account where asset_acct = account_id),
> (select number from account where expense_acct = account_id),
> (select number from account where income_acct = account_id),
> (se
On 09/27/2012 02:40 PM, David Boreham wrote:
I think the newer CPU is the clear winner with a specintrate
performance of 589 vs 432.
The comparisons you linked to had 24 absolute threads pitted against 32,
since the newer CPUs have a higher maximum cores per CPU. That said,
you're right that
On 09/27/2012 03:44 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
This 100x this. We used to buy our boxes from aberdeeninc.com and got
a 5 year replacement parts warranty included. We spent ~$10k on a
server that was right around $18k from dell for the same numbers and a
3 year warranty.
Whatever you do, go for
On 09/27/2012 01:37 PM, Craig James wrote:
I don't think you've supplied enough information for anyone to give
you a meaningful answer. What's your current configuration? Are you
I/O bound, CPU bound, memory limited, or some other problem? You need
to do a specific analysis of the queries that
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> On Thursday, September 27, 2012 02:13:01 PM David Boreham wrote:
>> The equivalent Supermicro box looks to be somewhat less expensive :
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816101693
>>
>> When you consider downtime and the
On Thursday, September 27, 2012 02:13:01 PM David Boreham wrote:
> The equivalent Supermicro box looks to be somewhat less expensive :
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816101693
>
> When you consider downtime and the cost to ship equipment back to the
> supplier, a warranty
On 9/27/2012 1:56 PM, M. D. wrote:
I'm in Belize, so what I'm considering is from ebay, where it's
unlikely that I'll get the warranty. Should I consider some other
brand rather? To build my own or buy custom might be an option too,
but I would not get any warranty.
I don't have any recent ex
On 09/27/2012 01:47 PM, David Boreham wrote:
On 9/27/2012 1:37 PM, Craig James wrote:
We use a "white box" vendor (ASA Computers), and have been very happy
with the results. They build exactly what I ask for and deliver it in
about a week. They offer on-site service and warranties, but don't
p
On 9/27/2012 1:37 PM, Craig James wrote:
We use a "white box" vendor (ASA Computers), and have been very happy
with the results. They build exactly what I ask for and deliver it in
about a week. They offer on-site service and warranties, but don't
pressure me to buy them. I'm not locked in to
On 9/27/2012 1:11 PM, M. D. wrote:
I want to buy a new server, and am contemplating a Dell R710 or the
newer R720. The R710 has the x5600 series CPU, while the R720 has the
newer E5-2600 series CPU.
For this the best data I've found (excepting actually running tests on
the physical hardwar
On 09/27/2012 01:22 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 4:11 PM, M. D. wrote:
At this point I'm dealing with a fairly small database of 8 to 9 GB.
...
The on_hand lookup table
currently has 3 million rows after 4 years of data.
...
For both servers I'd have at least 32GB Ram a
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM, M. D. wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I want to buy a new server, and am contemplating a Dell R710 or the newer
> R720. The R710 has the x5600 series CPU, while the R720 has the newer
> E5-2600 series CPU.
>
> At this point I'm dealing with a fairly small database of 8
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 4:11 PM, M. D. wrote:
> At this point I'm dealing with a fairly small database of 8 to 9 GB.
...
> The on_hand lookup table
> currently has 3 million rows after 4 years of data.
...
> For both servers I'd have at least 32GB Ram and 4 Hard Drives in raid 10.
For a 9GB datab
Hi everyone,
I want to buy a new server, and am contemplating a Dell R710 or the
newer R720. The R710 has the x5600 series CPU, while the R720 has the
newer E5-2600 series CPU.
At this point I'm dealing with a fairly small database of 8 to 9 GB.
The server will be dedicated to Postgres and
So i tried to run your pgbench command with the postgres user but it's stil
telling me command not found
Rude - Last Territory
Ou écouter ?http://www.deezer.com/fr/music/last-territory/the-last-hope-3617781
(Post-apocalyptic Metal)http://www.deezer.com/fr/music/rude-undertaker
(Pop-Ro
Oh ok. But what is this command doing ? i'm gonna runn it today. I'll keep you
posted. Here is some EXPLAIN ANALYZE from the querys :
Nested Loop (cost=0.00..353722.89 rows=124893 width=16) (actual
time=261158.061..10304193.501 rows=99 loops=1) Join Filter: ((t2."X" >=
(t1.x_min)::double pre
36 matches
Mail list logo
