Although the results only focus on SATA2 HDD, these may be useful for a
comparison of ext4 vs. xfs :
http://www.fuzzy.cz/bench/compare-pgbench.php?type[]=btrfs-datacow-barrier:1&type[]=btrfs-datacow-nobarrier:1&type[]=btrfs-nodatacow-barrier:1&type[]=btrfs-nodatacow-nobarrier:1&type[]=ext4-writeb
Hi Josh,
at the moment the server is unreachable so I can’t calculate sizes. I run all
of my test both with all data loaded into Postgres and with no data loaded
(except from the single 20mln rows table with relative indexes).
To give you an idea, with all data loaded into Postgres with indexes t
Sorry, how much disk space is actually used by the tables, indexes, etc
involved in your queries? Or it that's a bit much to get, how much disk
space is occupied by your database in total?
Hi Josh,
> Did you already post the results of:
> cat /proc/sys/vm/zone_reclaim_mode
zone_reclaim_mode was set on 0 for all my tests. I’ve also set it to the other
values (1, 2, 4) but there was no improvement. Tests results are the following
(1 run for each test):
echo 0 > /proc/sys/vm/zone_re
A more simple "overview" might be "numactl —hardware”
> It returns the following output:
>
> sh-4.3# numactl --hardware
> available: 2 nodes (0-1)
> node 0 cpus: 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
> node 0 size: 64385 MB
> node 0 free: 56487 MB
> node 1 cpus: 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Hi Aidan,
thank you again for your support.
I found an interesting article showing better performance from a Intel i5 vs a
Intel Xeon on different Postgres versions:
http://blog.pgaddict.com/posts/performance-since-postgresql-7-4-to-9-4-pgbench
I have to say that MacMini has a 2011 CPU (
http://
Hi didier,
thank you for your time.
I forgot to display before the output of free. I’ve looked into it before and I
found difficult to fully understand if there was something wrong.
Before starting Postgres:
total used free sharedbuffers cached
Mem: 1
