Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: How to get higher tps

From: Mark Lewis <mark(dot)lewis(at)mir3(dot)com>
To: Marty Jia <mjia(at)ask(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, DBAs <DBAs(at)ask(dot)com>, Rich Wilson <richwilson(at)ask(dot)com>, Ernest Wurzbach <EWurzbach(at)ask(dot)com>
Subject: Re: How to get higher tps
Date: 2006-08-22 14:31:49
Message-ID: 1156257109.9657.93.camel@archimedes (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Well, at least on my test machines running gnome-terminal, my pgbench
runs tend to get throttled by gnome-terminal's lousy performance to no
more than 300 tps or so.  Running with 2>/dev/null to throw away all the
detailed logging gives me 2-3x improvement in scores.  Caveat: in my
case the db is on the local machine, so who knows what all the
interactions are.

Also, when you initialized the pgbench db what scaling factor did you
use?  And does running pgbench with -v improve performance at all?

-- Mark

On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 09:19 -0400, Marty Jia wrote:
> Joshua,
> 
> Here is 
> 
> shared_buffers = 80000
> fsync = on
> max_fsm_pages = 350000
> max_connections = 1000
> work_mem = 65536
> effective_cache_size = 610000
> random_page_cost = 3
>  
> Here is pgbench I used:
> 
> pgbench -c 10 -t 10000 -d HQDB
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marty
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua D. Drake [mailto:jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com] 
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 6:09 PM
> To: Marty Jia
> Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] How to get higher tps
> 
> Marty Jia wrote:
> > I'm exhausted to try all performance tuning ideas, like following 
> > parameters
> > 
> > shared_buffers
> > fsync
> > max_fsm_pages
> > max_connections
> > shared_buffers
> > work_mem
> > max_fsm_pages
> > effective_cache_size
> > random_page_cost
> > 
> > I believe all above have right size and values, but I just can not get
> 
> > higher tps more than 300 testd by pgbench
> 
> What values did you use?
> 
> > 
> > Here is our hardware
> > 
> > 
> > Dual Intel Xeon 2.8GHz
> > 6GB RAM
> > Linux 2.4 kernel
> > RedHat Enterprise Linux AS 3
> > 200GB for PGDATA on 3Par, ext3
> > 50GB for WAL on 3Par, ext3
> > 
> > With PostgreSql 8.1.4
> > 
> > We don't have i/o bottle neck. 
> 
> Are you sure? What does iostat say during a pgbench? What parameters are
> you passing to pgbench?
> 
> Well in theory, upgrading to 2.6 kernel will help as well as making your
> WAL ext2 instead of ext3.
> 
> > Whatelse I can try to better tps? Someone told me I can should get tps
> 
> > over 1500, it is hard to believe.
> 
> 1500? Hmmm... I don't know about that, I can get 470tps or so on my
> measily dual core 3800 with 2gig of ram though.
> 
> Joshua D. Drake
> 
> 
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > Marty
> > 
> > ---------------------------(end of 
> > broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> > 
> 
> 

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Eamonn KentDate: 2006-08-22 15:25:30
Subject: Re: Vacuum not identifying rows for removal..
Previous:From: Marty JiaDate: 2006-08-22 13:19:40
Subject: Re: How to get higher tps

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group