Re: Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen

For me 12000 tps until now

24 core, 150 Gb ram
- 5 ssd raid 5
- Debian 7.8
- Postgres 9.3.5

...with Postgres parameters customized:

- checkpoint_segments 1000
- checkpoint_completion_target 0.9
- wal_buffers 256MB
- shared_buffers 31 gb
- max_connections 500
- effective_io_concurrency 15

..and finally pgbench parameters

- scale 350
- clients 300
- threads 30
- 60 seconds test run time
Em 10/02/2015 22:32, "Mark Kirkwood" <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>
escreveu:

> On 10/02/15 10:29, Gavin Flower wrote:
>
>> On 10/02/15 08:30, Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> A survay: with pgbench using TPS-B, what is the maximum TPS you're
>>> ever seen?
>>>
>>> For me: 12000 TPS.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior
>>>
>> Important to specify:
>>
>> 1. O/S
>> 2. version of PostgreSQL
>> 3. PostgreSQL configuration
>> 4. hardware configuration
>> 5. anything else that might affect performance
>>
>> I suspect that Linux will out perform Microsoft on the same hardware,
>> and optimum configuration for both O/S's...
>>
>>
>
> Yes, exactly - and also the pgbench parameters:
>
> - scale
> - number of clients
> - number of threads
> - statement options (prepared or simple etc)
> - length of test
>
> We've managed to get 40000 to 60000 TPS on some pretty serious hardware:
>
> - 60 core, 1 TB ram
> - 16 SSD + 4 PCIe SSD storage
> - Ubuntu 14.04
> - Postgres 9.4 (beta and rc)
>
> ...with Postgres parameters customized:
>
> - checkpoint_segments 1920
> - checkpoint_completion_target 0.8
> - wal_buffers 256MB
> - wal_sync_method open_datasync
> - shared_buffers 10GB
> - max_connections 600
> - effective_io_concurrency 10
>
> ..and finally pgbench parameters
>
> - scale 2000
> - clients 32, 64, 128, 256 (best results at 32 and 64 generally)
> - threads = 1/2 client number
> - prepared option
> - 10 minute test run time
>
> Points to note, we did *not* disable fsync or prevent buffers being
> actually written (common dirty tricks in benchmarks). However, as others
> have remarked - raw numbers mean little. Pgbench is very useful for testing
> how tuning configurations are helping (or not) for a particular hardware
> and software setup, but is less useful for answering the question "how many
> TPS can postgres do"...
>
> Regards
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>