Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Mar 2008 17:14:40 +0100
From:      Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
To:        freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: pgbench results
Message-ID:  <fr6at8$tpm$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <571396.91912.qm@web50512.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References:  <fr33lg$tdu$1@ger.gmane.org> <571396.91912.qm@web50512.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig2980F56084A3056FC398C300
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

http://www.kaltenbrunner.cc/blog/index.php?/archives/21-guid.html

alan bryan wrote:

> Here's mine for a somewhat similar setup. =20
> FreeBSD 7.0 PostgreSQL 8.3
> 2x Intel Xeon 2.33GHZ quad cores (8 cores total), 8GB
> RAM, 250GB RAID 10 (4x WD Raptor 10K drives).
>=20
> Non-default settings:=20
>=20
>                        =20
> max_connections =3D 200=20
> shared_buffers =3D 1900MB
> wal_buffers =3D 1024kB
> checkpoint_segments =3D 192            =20
> checkpoint_timeout =3D 30min=20
>=20
> createdb testdb
> pgbench -i -s 100 testdb
>=20
> # pgbench -c 100 -t 100000 testdb
> starting vacuum...end.
> transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
> scaling factor: 100
> number of clients: 100
> number of transactions per client: 100000
> number of transactions actually processed:
> 10000000/10000000
> tps =3D 1650.806584 (including connections establishing)
> tps =3D 1650.905036 (excluding connections establishing)
>=20
> So, not as high as his numbers but then I've got less
> RAM, one less drive spindle in my array (2 vs. 3 in
> performance for the raid 10 setup), SATA vs. SCSI,
> he's got 512MB of controller cache vs my 128MB.

The thing is - I *do* have a similar setup here: HP DL370 G5, 2x4-core
1.86 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 6 drives in RAID10, 512 MB cache (can pull > 200
MB/s off the array), with all settings like in the posted link except
shared_buffer=3D1900 MB, and I "only" get this:

tps =3D 2834.026175 (including connections establishing)
tps =3D 2839.080739 (excluding connections establishing)

This is still far bellow ~~ 4500 trans/s from the link and I wonder if
my results are within what I should be getting. The benchmark in the
link above was done with faster CPUs (but I'm not CPU bound - at least
30% idle), but with 3 times the memory and I'm guessing more memory
would help here, but I'm not sure.

What's strange is that toggling synchronous_commit doesn't have a
significant effect on performance (it does increase CPU idle time). With
synchronous_commit=3Doff, I get:

tps =3D 2886.980477 (including connections establishing)
tps =3D 2891.776081 (excluding connections establishing)


--------------enig2980F56084A3056FC398C300
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFH1q/wldnAQVacBcgRAniVAJwJSqrKPUshKrhhG1wXhG4QkmCEtACg03ZN
IkdfVNWM5rbFP+k5XZXEmUY=
=kKJZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig2980F56084A3056FC398C300--




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fr6at8$tpm$1>