On 26/05/11 20:31, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
> Would HT have any impact to the I/O performance (postgresql, and fs in
> general) ?.
There have been previous discussions on this list about HT on vs off (I
can't recall what the consensus, if any about what the cause of any
performance difference was). In our case HT off gave us much better
results for what we think the typical number of clients will be - see
attached (server learn-db1 is setup with trivial hardware raid and then
software raided via md, learn-db2 has its raid all in hardware. We've
ended up going with the latter setup).
Note that the highest tps on the graph is about 2100 - we got this upto
just over 2300 by changing from ext4 to xfs in later tests, and managed
to push the tps for 100 clients up a little by setting no read ahead
(NORA) for the arrays.
Description: image/png (14.0 KB) (inlined above)
Description: image/png (14.5 KB) (inlined above)
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Greg Smith||Date: 2011-05-26 23:10:19|
|Subject: Re: The shared buffers challenge|
|Previous:||From: Tory M Blue||Date: 2011-05-26 22:34:55|
|Subject: Performance block size.|