From: | Cédric Villemain <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Chris Hoover <revoohc(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PGSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Benchmarking a large server |
Date: | 2011-05-09 23:52:01 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTikecJCGWH0WyKFiSnC08kmcwS7FqA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
2011/5/9 Chris Hoover <revoohc(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> I've got a fun problem.
> My employer just purchased some new db servers that are very large. The
> specs on them are:
> 4 Intel X7550 CPU's (32 physical cores, HT turned off)
> 1 TB Ram
> 1.3 TB Fusion IO (2 1.3 TB Fusion IO Duo cards in a raid 10)
> 3TB Sas Array (48 15K 146GB spindles)
> The issue we are running into is how do we benchmark this server,
> specifically, how do we get valid benchmarks for the Fusion IO card?
> Normally to eliminate the cache effect, you run iozone and other benchmark
> suites at 2x the ram. However, we can't do that due to 2TB > 1.3TB.
> So, does anyone have any suggestions/experiences in benchmarking storage
> when the storage is smaller then 2x memory?
You can reduce the memory size on server boot.
If you use linux, you can add a 'mem=512G' to your boot time
parameters. (maybe it supports only K or M, so 512*1024...)
> Thanks,
> Chris
--
Cédric Villemain 2ndQuadrant
http://2ndQuadrant.fr/ PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig James | 2011-05-10 00:32:19 | Re: Benchmarking a large server |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2011-05-09 23:30:38 | Re: Postgres 9.0.4 + Hot Standby + FusionIO Drive + Performance => Query failed ERROR: catalog is missing 1 attribute(s) for relid 172226 |