On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 01:54:06PM -0400, Jeff wrote:
> Yep - you need multiple threads to get max throughput of your io.
I am running:
~/pgiosim -c -b 100G -v -t4 file[0-9]*
Will each thread move 100GB of data? I am seeing:
158.69%, 4260 read, 0 written, 3407.64kB/sec 425.95 iops
On May 16, 2011, at 1:06 PM, John Rouillard wrote:
that is a #define in pgiosim.c
So which is a better test, modifying the #define to allow specifying
200-300 1GB files, or using 64 files but increasing the size of my
files to 2-3GB for a total bytes in the file two or three times the
memory
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:23:13PM -0400, Jeff wrote:
> On May 16, 2011, at 9:17 AM, John Rouillard wrote:
> >However, in my case I have an 8 disk raid 10 with a read only load (in
> >this testing configuration). Shouldn't I expect more iops than a
> >single disk can provide? Maybe pgiosim is hitti
On May 16, 2011, at 9:17 AM, John Rouillard wrote:
I am seeing really poor (70) iops with pgiosim. According to:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2tb-hdd-7200,2430-8.html in the
database benchmark they are seeing ~170 iops on a single disk for
these drives. I would expect an 8 disk raid 10
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 12:07:02PM -0500, k...@rice.edu wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 09:09:41PM +, John Rouillard wrote:
> > I am adding pgiosim to our testing for new database hardware and I am
> > seeing something I don't quite get and I think it's because I am using
> > pgiosim incorrect
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 09:09:41PM +, John Rouillard wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> I am adding pgiosim to our testing for new database hardware and I am
> seeing something I don't quite get and I think it's because I am using
> pgiosim incorrectly.
>
> Specs:
>
> OS: centos 5.5 kernel: 2.6.18-194.3
Hi all:
I am adding pgiosim to our testing for new database hardware and I am
seeing something I don't quite get and I think it's because I am using
pgiosim incorrectly.
Specs:
OS: centos 5.5 kernel: 2.6.18-194.32.1.el5
memory: 96GB
cpu: 2x Intel(R) Xeon(R) X5690 @ 3.47GHz (6 core, ht ena
