On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, Stephane Bailliez wrote:
I'm 'migrating' (read entirely changing schemas, 'migrating' data) is
coming out from a 8.1.11 install. It is not a critical system. The
source data is always available from another system and the postgresql
system would be a 'client'. So if 8.2.x
Greg Smith wrote:
CFQ/Deadline/AS are I/O scheduler choices. What changed completely in
2.6.23 is the kernel process scheduler.
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/sched-design-CFS.txt
gives some info about the new one.
While the switch to CFS has shown great improvements in terms o
Emil Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> At least on debian it was quite easy to "backport" 8.3.3 from sid
>> to etch using apt-get's source and build-dep functions. That way
>> you get a normal installable package.
> I should have said that I was talking about the postgresql, I
> missed the
--On tisdag, juli 22, 2008 01.20.52 +0200 Emil Pedersen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
Yes I'd definitely prefer to go 8.3 as well but there are a couple
reasons for now I have to suck it up:
- 8.2 is the one in the 7.10 repository.
- I need plr as well and 8.3-plr debian package does n
[...]
Yes I'd definitely prefer to go 8.3 as well but there are a couple
reasons for now I have to suck it up:
- 8.2 is the one in the 7.10 repository.
- I need plr as well and 8.3-plr debian package does not exist yet.
(I know in both cases we could recompile and install it from there,
but ..
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Stephane Bailliez wrote:
Isn't it a scheduler problem, I thought CFQ was the default for desktop
?
CFQ/Deadline/AS are I/O scheduler choices. What changed completely in
2.6.23 is the kernel process scheduler.
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/sched-design-CFS
Greg Smith wrote:
Note that I've had some issues with the desktop Ubuntu giving slower
results in tests like this than the same kernel release using the
stock kernel parameters. Haven't had a chance yet to see how the
server Ubuntu kernel fits into that or exactly what the desktop one is
do
Hi Stephane,
On 7/21/08 1:53 AM, "Stephane Bailliez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'd suggest RAID5, or even better, configure all eight disks as a JBOD
>> in the RAID adapter and run ZFS RAIDZ. You would then expect to get
>> about 7 x 80 = 560 MB/s on your single query.
>>
> Do you have a pa
Luke Lonergan wrote:
pgbench is unrelated to the workload you are concerned with if ETL/ELT
and decision support / data warehousing queries are your target.
Also - placing the xlog on dedicated disks is mostly irrelevant to
data warehouse / decision support work or ELT. If you need to
maxi
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, Stephane Bailliez wrote:
OS is Ubuntu 7.10 x86_64 running 2.6.22-14
Note that I've had some issues with the desktop Ubuntu giving slower
results in tests like this than the same kernel release using the stock
kernel parameters. Haven't had a chance yet to see how the s
).
- Luke
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Sent: Sat Jul 19 09:19:43 2008
Subject: [PERFORM] Performance on Sun Fire X4150 x64 (dd, bonnie++, pgbench)
I'm trying to run a few basic tests to see what a current machine
I'm trying to run a few basic tests to see what a current machine can
deliver (typical workload ETL like, long running aggregate queries,
medium size db ~100 to 200GB).
I'm currently checking the system (dd, bonnie++) to see if performances
are within the normal range but I'm having trouble
12 matches
Mail list logo
