From: | "Joost Kraaijeveld" <J(dot)Kraaijeveld(at)Askesis(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Pgsql-Performance (E-mail)" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Can anyone explain this pgbench results? |
Date: | 2006-03-07 20:15:37 |
Message-ID: | A3D1526C98B7C1409A687E0943EAC410605FC9@obelix.askesis.nl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Well, the problem is that you're using RAID5, which has a huge write
> overhead. You're unlikely to get good performance with it.
Apparently. But I had no idea that the performance hit would be that big.
Running bonnie or copying a large file with dd show that the card can do 30-50 MB/sec. Running a large update on my postgresql database however, show a throughtput of ~ 2MB/sec, doing between ~ 2500 - 2300 writes/second (avarage). with an utilisation of almost always 100%, and large await times ( almost always > 700), large io-wait percentages (>50%), all measured with iostat.
> Also, it sounds like sda and sdb are not mirrored. If that's the case,
> you have no protection from a drive failure taking out your entire
> database, because you'd lose pg_xlog.
>
> If you want better performance your best bets are to either
> setup RAID10 or if you don't care about the data, just go to RAID0.
Because it is just my development machine I think I will opt for the last option. More diskspace left.
Groeten,
Joost Kraaijeveld
Askesis B.V.
Molukkenstraat 14
6524NB Nijmegen
tel: 024-3888063 / 06-51855277
fax: 024-3608416
e-mail: J(dot)Kraaijeveld(at)Askesis(dot)nl
web: www.askesis.nl
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-03-07 20:21:02 | Re: Can anyone explain this pgbench results? |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2006-03-07 20:08:50 | Re: Postgres on VPS - how much is enough? |