From: | Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql(at)jamponi(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com>, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? |
Date: | 2010-11-17 21:36:44 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimtO6FhmGwpyUZSemCCS98-NpmEOfK=NdwapHpv@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Scott Carey wrote:
>>
>> Did you recompile your test on the RHEL6 system?
>
> On both systems I showed, I checked out a fresh copy of the PostgreSQL 9.1
> HEAD from the git repo, and compiled that on the server, to make sure I was
> pulling in the appropriate kernel headers. I wasn't aware of exactly how
> the kernel sync stuff was refactored though, thanks for the concise update
> on that. I can do similar tests on a RHEL5 system, but not on the same
> hardware. Can only make my laptop boot so many operating systems at a time
> usefully.
One thing to note is that where on a disk things sit can make a /huge/
difference - depending on if Ubuntu is /here/ and RHEL is /there/ and
so on can make a factor of 2 or more difference. The outside tracks
of most modern SATA disks can do around 120MB/s. The inside tracks
aren't even half of that.
--
Jon
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Humair Mohammed | 2010-11-17 21:50:25 | Re: Query Performance SQL Server vs. Postgresql |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2010-11-17 21:24:54 | Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? |