Re: The need for clustered indexes to boost TPC-V performance

Well, I keep failing to send an email with an attachment. Do I need a moderator's approval?

Yes, running on VMs and a lower bin processor. With the virtualization overhead, etc., I figure we would be running right around 2/3 of the Dell throughput if we were running the same DBMS.

I sent the following message twice today with attachments (postgresql.conf, etc.), and it hasn't been posted yet. Here it is without an attachment.

****************************************************

From: Reza Taheri
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 11:34 AM
To: 'Craig Ringer'
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org; Robert Haas
Subject: RE: [PERFORM] The need for clustered indexes to boost TPC-V performance

OK, some config details.
We are using:

* Two blades of an HP BladeSystem c-Class c7000 with 2-socket Intel E5520 (Nehalem-EP) processors and 48GB of memory per blade
o 8 cores, 16 threads per blade
o 48GB of RAM per blade
* Storage was an EMC VNX5700 with 14 SSDs fronting 32 15K RPM drives
* The Tier B database VM was alone on a blade with 16 vCPUs, 40GB of memory, 4 virtual drives with various RAID levels
* The driver and Tier A VMs were on the second blade
o So we set PGHOST on the client system to point to the server
* RHEL 6.1
* PostgreSQL 8.4
* unixODBC 2.3.2

We stuck with PGSQL 8.4 since it is the stock version shipped with RHEL 6. I am building a new, larger testbed, and will switch to PGSQL 9 with that.

Postgres.conf is attached.

Thanks,
Reza

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Colson [mailto:andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 5:42 PM
> To: Samuel Gendler
> Cc: Reza Taheri; Robert Klemme; pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] The need for clustered indexes to boost TPC-V
> performance
>
> On 07/05/2012 03:52 PM, Samuel Gendler wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Reza Taheri <rtaheri(at)vmware(dot)com
> <mailto:rtaheri(at)vmware(dot)com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I provided more config details in an earlier email.____
> >
> > __ __
> >
> >
> >
> > I hate to disagree, but unless I didn't get a message sent to the list, you
> haven't provided any details about your postgresql config or otherwise
> adhered to the guidelines for starting a discussion of a performance
> problem around here. I just searched my mailbox and no email from you
> has any such details. Several people have asked for them, including myself.
> You say you will give any details we want, but this is at least the 3rd or 4th
> request for such details and they have not yet been forthcoming.
>
>
> Reza, I went back and looked myself. I see no specs on OS, or hardware....
> unless you mean this:
>
>
> > http://bit.ly/QeWXhE. This was run on a similar server, and the database
> size is close to ours.
>
>
> You're running on windows then? Server is 96Gig ram, 8 cores, (dell
> poweredge T610).
> with two powervault MD1120 NAS's?
>
> But then I assume you were not running on that, were you. You were
> running vmware on it, probably?
>
>
> -Andy