Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS

From: Jeff Frost <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Ron <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>, Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1(at)burntmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS
Date: 2007-01-09 17:10:51
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0701090908300.3681@discord.home.frostconsultingllc.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Jim C. Nasby wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 02:15:31PM -0800, Jeff Frost wrote:
>> When benchmarking various options for a new PG server at one of my clients,
>> I tried ext2 and ext3 (data=writeback) for the WAL and it appeared to be
>> fastest to have ext2 for the WAL. The winning time was 157m46.713s for
>> ext2, 159m47.098s for combined ext3 data/xlog and 158m25.822s for ext3
>> data=writeback. This was on an 8x150GB Raptor RAID10 on an Areca 1130 w/
>> 1GB BBU cache. This config benched out faster than a 6disk RAID10 + 2 disk
>> RAID1 for those of you who have been wondering if the BBU write back cache
>> mitigates the need for separate WAL (at least on this workload). Those are
>> the fastest times for each config, but ext2 WAL was always faster than the
>> other two options. I didn't test any other filesystems in this go around.
>
> Uh, if I'm reading this correctly, you're saying that WAL on a separate
> ext2 vs. one big ext3 with data=writeback saved ~39 seconds out of
> ~158.5 minutes, or 0.4%? Is that even above the noise for your
> measurements? I suspect the phase of the moon might play a bigger role
> ;P

That's what I thought too...cept I ran it 20 times and ext2 won by that margin
every time, so it was quite repeatable. :-/

--
Jeff Frost, Owner <jeff(at)frostconsultingllc(dot)com>
Frost Consulting, LLC http://www.frostconsultingllc.com/
Phone: 650-780-7908 FAX: 650-649-1954

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeremy Haile 2007-01-09 17:26:41 High inserts, bulk deletes - autovacuum vs scheduled vacuum
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2007-01-09 16:44:57 Re: Postgresql Configutation and overflow