From: | Leigh Dyer <leigh(at)eclinic(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Mikael(dot)Carneholm(at)WirelessCar(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: Performance with 2 AMD/Opteron 2.6Ghz and 8gig |
Date: | 2006-07-28 14:17:37 |
Message-ID: | 44CA1C81.8060703@eclinic.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Mikael Carneholm wrote:
> I would be interested in what numbers you would get out of bonnie++
> (http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++) and BenchmarkSQL
> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/benchmarksql) on that hardware, for
> comparison with our DL385 (2xOpteron 280, 16Gb ram) and MSA1500. If you
> need help building benchmarksql, I can assist you with that.
>
> Actually, I would be interested if everyone who's reading this that has
> a similar machine (2 cpu, dual core opteron) with different storage
> systems could send me their bonnie + benchmarksql results!
>
Here's the bonnie++ results from our Sun Fire V40z (2x Opteron 250, 4GB
RAM) with 6 15krpm 73GB drives connected to an LSI MegaRAID 320-2X
controller with 512MB cache. It's running Linux, and I'm using what
seems to be a fairly typical 6-drive setup: 2 drives in RAID-1 for OS
and WAL, and 4 drives in RAID-10 for data. This is from the 4-drive
RAID-10 array:
Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input-
--Random-
-Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block--
--Seeks--
Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
/sec %CP
gaz 8G 56692 88 73061 12 33048 6 44994 64 132571 14
474.0 0
------Sequential Create------ --------Random
Create--------
-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read---
-Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
/sec %CP
16 19448 88 +++++ +++ 18611 72 19952 90 +++++ +++
15167 65
This system is actually in production currently, and while it's a rather
quiet time at the moment, it still wasn't _entirely_ inactive when those
numbers were run, so the real performance is probably a little higher.
I'll see if I can run some BenchmarkSQL numbers as well.
Thanks
Leigh
> /Mikael
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Luke
> Lonergan
> Sent: den 28 juli 2006 08:55
> To: Kjell Tore Fossbakk; pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Performance with 2 AMD/Opteron 2.6Ghz and 8gig
>
> Kjell,
>
>> I got 4 150GIG SCSI disks in a Smart Array 5i 1+0 RAID.
>
> The Smart Array 5i is a terrible performer on Linux. I would be
> surprised if you exceed the performance of a single hard drive with this
> controller when doing I/O from disk. Since your database working set is
> larger than memory on the machine, I would recommend you use a simple
> non-RAID U320 SCSI controller, like those from LSI Logic (which HP
> resells) and implement Linux software RAID. You should see a nearly 10x
> increase in performance as compared to the SmartArray 5i.
>
> If you have a good relationship with HP, please ask them for some
> documentation of RAID performance on Linux with the SmartArray 5i. I
> predict they will tell you what they've told me and others: "the 5i is
> only useful for booting the OS". Alternately they could say: "we have
> world record performance with our RAID controllers", in which case you
> should ask them if that was with the 5i on Linux or whether it was the
> 6-series on Windows.
>
> - Luke
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> match
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Trout | 2006-07-28 17:31:21 | Re: Performance with 2 AMD/Opteron 2.6Ghz and 8gig |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2006-07-28 14:03:07 | Re: Disk writes |