On 7/14/05, Jeffrey W. Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [reposted due to delivery error -jwb]
>
> I just took delivery of a new system, and used the opportunity to
> benchmark postgresql 8.0 performance on various filesystems. The system
> in question runs Linux 2.6.12, has one CPU and 1GB of system memory, and
> 5 7200RPM SATA disks attached to an Areca hardware RAID controller
> having 128MB of cache. The caches are all write-back.
>
> I ran pgbench with a scale factor of 1000 and a total of 100,000
> transactions per run. I varied the number of clients between 10 and
> 100. It appears from my test JFS is much faster than both ext3 and XFS
> for this workload. JFS and XFS were made with the mkfs defaults. ext3
> was made with -T largefile4 and -E stride=32. The deadline scheduler
> was used for all runs (anticipatory scheduler is much worse).
>
> Here's the result, in transactions per second.
>
> ext3 jfs xfs
> -----------------------------
> 10 Clients 55 81 68
> 100 Clients 61 100 64
> ----------------------------
If you still have a chance, could you do tests with other journaling
options for ext3 (journal=writeback, journal=data)? And could you
give figures about performace of other IO elevators? I mean, you
wrote that anticipatory is much wore -- how much worse? :) Could
you give numbers for deadline,anticipatory,cfq elevators? :)
And, additionally would it be possible to give numbers for bonnie++
results? To see how does pgbench to bonnie++ relate?
Regards,
Dawid
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
