Re: HDD vs SSD without explanation

From: Fernando Hevia <fhevia(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Georg H(dot)" <georg-h(at)silentrunner(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: HDD vs SSD without explanation
Date: 2018-01-15 19:55:25
Message-ID: CAGYT1XRgSpEjS6OSYMpER5-33W4ZZXU+C18OWypfEs=GEzUZfQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

2018-01-15 15:32 GMT-03:00 Georg H. <georg-h(at)silentrunner(dot)de>:

>
> Hello Neto
>
> Am 14.01.2018 um 21:44 schrieb Neto pr:
>
>> Dear all
>>
>> Someone help me analyze the two execution plans below (Explain ANALYZE
>> used), is the query 9 of TPC-H benchmark [1].
>> I'm using a server HP Intel Xeon 2.8GHz/4-core - Memory 8GB HDD SAS 320GB
>> 15 Krpm AND SSD Sansung EVO 500GB.
>> My DBMS parameters presents in postgresql.conf is default, but in SSD I
>> have changed random_page_cost = 1.0.
>>
>> you are comparing a SAS Drive against a SATA SSD. Their interfaces serve
> a completely different bandwidth.
> While a SAS-3 device does 12 Gbit/s SATA-3 device is only able to
> transfer 6 Gbit/s (a current SAS-4 reaches 22.5 Gbit/s)
> Do a short research on SAS vs SATA and then use a SAS SSD for comparison :)
>

The query being all read operations both drives should perform somewhat
similarly. Therefore, either the SAS drive has some special sauce to it
(a.k.a very fast built-in cache) or there is something else going on these
systems. Otherwise he shouldn't be stressing the 6 Gbit/s interface limit
with a single drive, be that the SATA or the SAS drive.

Neto, you have been suggested to provide a number of command outputs to
know more about your system. Testing the raw read throughput of both your
drives should be first on your list.

Cheers.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neto pr 2018-01-15 23:10:17 Re: HDD vs SSD without explanation
Previous Message Brian Busch 2018-01-15 19:46:56 Re: HDD vs SSD without explanation