| From: | david(at)lang(dot)hm |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Wong <markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Gabrielle Roth <gorthx(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Software vs. Hardware RAID Data |
| Date: | 2008-08-20 05:49:48 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.1.10.0808192244380.12859@asgard.lang.hm |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Mark Wong wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We started an attempt to slice the data we've been collecting in
> another way, to show the results of software vs. hardware RAID:
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/HP_ProLiant_DL380_G5_Tuning_Guide#Hardware_vs._Software_Raid
>
> The angle we're trying to show here is the processor utilization and
> i/o throughput for a given file system and raid configuration. I
> wasn't sure about the best way to present it, so this is how it looks
> so far. Click on the results for a chart of the aggregate processor
> utilization for the test.
>
> Comments, suggestions, criticisms, et al. welcome.
it's really good to show cpu utilization as well as throughput, but how
about showing the cpu utilization as %cpu per MB/s (possibly with a flag
to indicate any entries that look like they may have hit cpu limits)
why did you use 4M stripe size on the software raid? especially on raid 5
this seems like a lot of data to have to touch when making an update.
David Lang
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tommy Gildseth | 2008-08-20 07:53:37 | Re: Software vs. Hardware RAID Data |
| Previous Message | Mark Wong | 2008-08-20 05:23:16 | Software vs. Hardware RAID Data |