Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-21 Thread Piotr Legiecki
Scott Marlowe pisze: Is one connecting via SSL? Is this a simple flat switched network, or are these machines on different segments connected via routers? SSL is disabled. It is switched network, all tested computers are in the same segment. Finally I have switched the production database f

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-17 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Piotr Legiecki wrote: > Scott Marlowe pisze: > So still I don't get this: select * from table; on old server takes 0,5 sec, on new one takes 6sec. Why there is so big difference? And it does not matter how good or bad select is to measure perfor

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-17 Thread Piotr Legiecki
Scott Marlowe pisze: So still I don't get this: select * from table; on old server takes 0,5 sec, on new one takes 6sec. Why there is so big difference? And it does not matter how good or bad select is to measure performance, because I don't measure the performance, I measure the relative diffe

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-17 Thread Scott Marlowe
Whoops, wrong thread. On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:52 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Scott Marlowe > wrote: >> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:06 AM, Piotr Legiecki wrote: >>> 2. select count(*) from some_table; runs in a fraction of a second on the >>> console on both serv

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-17 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:06 AM, Piotr Legiecki wrote: >> 2. select count(*) from some_table; runs in a fraction of a second on the >> console on both servers (there are only 4000 records, the second longer >> table has 5 but it does not

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-17 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:06 AM, Piotr Legiecki wrote: > 2. select count(*) from some_table; runs in a fraction of a second on the > console on both servers (there are only 4000 records, the second longer > table has 5 but it does not matter very much). From pg_admin the results > are: > - slo

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-17 Thread Piotr Legiecki
Scott Marlowe pisze: 2010/5/14 Piotr Legiecki : So what is the problem? My simple 'benchmarks' I have done with pgAdmin in spare time. pgAdmin is the latest 1.8.2 on both D and E. Using pgAdmin on my (D) computer I have run SELECT * from some_table; and noted the execution time on both A and B

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Sarwani Dwinanto
15:03:26 To: Piotr Legiecki Cc: Subject: Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance 2010/5/14 Piotr Legiecki > Hi > > I have a situation at my work which I simply don't understand and hope > that here I can find some explanations. > > What is on the scene: &g

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Scott Carey
On May 14, 2010, at 3:52 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote: > 2010/5/14 Piotr Legiecki : >> So what is the problem? My simple 'benchmarks' I have done with pgAdmin in >> spare time. >> >> pgAdmin is the latest 1.8.2 on both D and E. >> Using pgAdmin on my (D) computer I have run SELECT * from some_table;

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Scott Marlowe
2010/5/14 Piotr Legiecki : > So what is the problem? My simple 'benchmarks' I have done with pgAdmin in > spare time. > > pgAdmin is the latest 1.8.2 on both D and E. > Using pgAdmin on my (D) computer I have run SELECT * from some_table; and > noted the execution time on both A and B servers: So,

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Thom Brown
2010/5/14 Piotr Legiecki > Hi > > I have a situation at my work which I simply don't understand and hope > that here I can find some explanations. > > What is on the scene: > A - old 'server' PC AMD Athlon64 3000+, 2GB RAM, 1 ATA HDD 150GB, Debian > etch, postgresql 8.1.19 > B - new server HP DL

[PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Piotr Legiecki
Hi I have a situation at my work which I simply don't understand and hope that here I can find some explanations. What is on the scene: A - old 'server' PC AMD Athlon64 3000+, 2GB RAM, 1 ATA HDD 150GB, Debian etch, postgresql 8.1.19 B - new server HP DL 360, 12GB RAM, Intel Xeon 8 cores CPU,

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Yeb Havinga
Kevin Grittner wrote: Piotr Legiecki wrote: Why there is no difference in database speed between those two machines? Could you post the contents of the postgresql.conf files for both (stripped of comments) and explain what you're using for your benchmarks? In particular, it would

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Scott Marlowe
2010/5/14 Piotr Legiecki : > Hi > The goal: migrate postgresql from A to B. > > Simple and works fine (using pg_dump, psql -d dbname > So what is the problem? My simple 'benchmarks' I have done with pgAdmin > in spare time. > > pgAdmin is the latest 1.8.2 on both D and E. > Using pgAdmin on my (D)

Re: [PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Kevin Grittner
Piotr Legiecki wrote: > Why there is no difference in database speed between those two > machines? Could you post the contents of the postgresql.conf files for both (stripped of comments) and explain what you're using for your benchmarks? In particular, it would be interesting to know how man

[PERFORM] old server, new server, same performance

2010-05-14 Thread Piotr Legiecki
Hi I have a situation at my work which I simply don't understand and hope that here I can find some explanations. What is on the scene: A - old 'server' PC AMD Athlon64 3000+, 2GB RAM, 1 ATA HDD 150GB, Debian etch, postgresql 8.1.19 B - new server HP DL 360, 12GB RAM, Intel Xeon 8 cores CPU, fas