Re: How to get higher tps

Marty,

Here's pgbench results from a stock FreeBSD 6.1 amd64/PG 8.1.4 install
on a Dell Poweredge 2950 with 8gb ram, 2x3.0 dual-core woodcrest (4MB
cache/socket) with 6x300GB 10k SAS drives:

pgbench -c 10 -t 10000 -d bench 2>/dev/null
pghost: pgport: (null) nclients: 10 nxacts: 10000 dbName: bench
`transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 20
number of clients: 10
number of transactions per client: 10000
number of transactions actually processed: 100000/100000
tps = 561.056729 (including connections establishing)
tps = 561.127760 (excluding connections establishing)

Here's some iostat samples during the test:
tty mfid0 da0 cd0
cpu
tin tout KB/t tps MB/s KB/t tps MB/s KB/t tps MB/s us ni sy in
id
6 77 16.01 1642 25.67 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 3 0 8
2 87
8 157 17.48 3541 60.43 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 24 0 28
4 43
5 673 17.66 2287 39.44 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 10 0 13
2 75
6 2818 16.37 2733 43.68 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 17 0 23
3 56
1 765 18.05 2401 42.32 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 15 0 17
3 65

Note- the above was with no tuning to the kernel or postgresql.conf.

Now for my question- it seems that I've still got quite a bit of
headroom on the hardware I'm running the above tests on, since I know
the array will pump out > 200 MB/s (dd, bonnie++ numbers), and CPU
appears mostly idle. This would indicate I should be able to get some
significantly better numbers with postgresql.conf tweaks correct?

I guess the other problem is ensuring that we're not testing RAM speeds,
since most of the data is probably in memory (BSD io buffers)? Although,
for the initial run, that doesn't seem to be the case, since subsequent
runs without rebuilding the benchmark db are slightly not believable
(i.e. 1,200 going up to >2,500 tps over 5 back-to-back runs). So, as
long as I re-initialize the benchdb before each run, it should be a
realistic test, right?

Thanks,

Bucky
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Joshua D.
Drake
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 12:16 PM
To: Marty Jia
Cc: Alex Turner; Mark Lewis; pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org; DBAs;
Rich Wilson; Ernest Wurzbach
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] How to get higher tps

Marty Jia wrote:
> Here is iostat when running pgbench:
>
> avg-cpu: %user %nice %sys %iowait %idle
> 26.17 0.00 8.25 23.17 42.42

You are are a little io bound and fairly cpu bound. I would be curious
if your performance goes down if you increase the number of connections
you are using.

Joshua D. Drake

>
> Device: tps Blk_read/s Blk_wrtn/s Blk_read Blk_wrtn
> sda 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sda2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sda3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sda4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sda5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sda6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sda7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdb 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdb1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdb2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdb3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdb4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdb5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdb6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdb7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sde 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdg 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdh 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0
> sdi 40.33 0.00 413.33 0 1240
> sdj 34.33 0.00 394.67 0 1184
> sdk 36.00 0.00 410.67 0 1232
> sdl 37.00 0.00 429.33 0 1288
> sdm 375.00 0.00 3120.00 0 9360
> sdn 378.33 0.00 3120.00 0 9360
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Alex Turner [mailto:armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 11:27 AM
> To: Mark Lewis
> Cc: Marty Jia; Joshua D. Drake; pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org;
DBAs;
> Rich Wilson; Ernest Wurzbach
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] How to get higher tps
>
>
> Oh - and it's usefull to know if you are CPU bound, or IO bound.
Check
> top or vmstat to get an idea of that
>
> Alex
>
>
> On 8/22/06, Alex Turner < armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com <mailto:armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com> >
> wrote:
>
> First things first, run a bonnie++ benchmark, and post the
> numbers. That will give a good indication of raw IO performance, and
is
> often the first inidication of problems separate from the DB. We have
> seen pretty bad performance from SANs in the past. How many FC lines
do
> you have running to your server, remember each line is limited to
about
> 200MB/sec, to get good throughput, you will need multiple connections.

>
> When you run pgbench, run a iostat also and see what the numbers
> say.
>
>
> Alex.
>
>
>
> On 8/22/06, Mark Lewis < mark(dot)lewis(at)mir3(dot)com
> <mailto:mark(dot)lewis(at)mir3(dot)com> > wrote:
>
> 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
> > >
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an
> appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to
> majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list
> cleanly
>
>
>
>
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org