Re: Some performance testing?

From: Przemysław Deć <przemyslaw(dot)dec(at)linuxpolska(dot)pl>
To: "Graeme B(dot) Bell" <grb(at)skogoglandskap(dot)no>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Some performance testing?
Date: 2015-04-09 11:56:21
Message-ID: CADCcZRmrg820yvergYN6gpd+mnaqmehkZMDYqA6=hZmPTYd1bA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Wow, thats huge performance gain.
And it was on ext4?

--
Linux Polska Sp. z o.o.
Przemysław Deć - Senior Solutions Architect
RHCSA, RHCJA, PostgreSQL Professional Certification
mob: +48 519 130 141
email: pd(at)linuxpolska(dot)pl
www.linuxpolska.pl
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Linux Polska Sp. z o. o. Al. Jerozolimskie 123A (26 p.); 02-017 Warszawa;
tel. (+48) 222139571; fax (+48)222139671
KRS - 0000326158 Sąd Rejonowy dla M. St. Warszawy w Warszawie, XII Wydział
Gospodarczy KRS
Kapitał zakładowy wpłacony 1 000 500PLN; NIP 7010181018; REGON 141791601

[image: Open Source Day 2015] <http://opensourceday.pl/>

2015-04-09 13:01 GMT+02:00 Graeme B. Bell <grb(at)skogoglandskap(dot)no>:

>
> From a measurement I took back when we did the upgrade:
>
> performance with 2.6: (pgbench, size 100, 32 clients)
>
> 48 651 transactions per second (read only)
> 6 504 transactions per second (read-write)
>
>
> performance with 3.18 (pgbench, size 100, 32 clients)
>
> 129 303 transactions per second (read only)
> 16 895 transactions (read-write)
>
>
> So that looks like 2.6x improvement to reads and writes. That was an 8
> core xeon server with H710P and 4x crucial M550 SSDs in RAID, pg9.3.
>
> Graeme Bell
>
>
>
>
>
> On 09 Apr 2015, at 12:39, Przemysław Deć <przemyslaw(dot)dec(at)linuxpolska(dot)pl>
> wrote:
>
> > Can you say how much faster it was?
> >
> > Przemek Deć
> >
> > 2015-04-09 11:04 GMT+02:00 Graeme B. Bell <grb(at)skogoglandskap(dot)no>:
> > >
> > > Josh, there seems to be an inconsistency in your blog. You say 3.10.X
> is
> > > safe, but the graph you show with the poor performance seems to be from
> > > 3.13.X which as I understand it is a later kernel. Can you clarify
> which
> > > 3.X kernels are good to use and which are not?
> >
> > Sorry to cut in -
> >
> > So far we've found kernel 3.18 to be excellent for postgres 9.3
> performance (pgbench + our own queries run much faster than with the
> 2.6.32-504 centos 6 kernel, and we haven't encountered random stalls or
> slowness).
> >
> > We use elrepo to get prebuilt rpms of the latest mainline stable kernel
> (kernel-ml).
> >
> > http://elrepo.org/tiki/kernel-ml
> >
> > Graeme Bell
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Graeme B. Bell 2015-04-09 13:35:42 Re: Some performance testing?
Previous Message Graeme B. Bell 2015-04-09 11:01:51 Re: Some performance testing?