Just a follow-up to note that Red Hat has graciously donated a 1 year
RHEL subscription and myYearbook is paying Command Prompt to setup the
RHEL box for community use.
We've not worked out a scheduling methodology, or how to best organize
the use of said hardware, but I know that Tom and others
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just a follow-up to note that Red Hat has graciously donated a 1 year
RHEL subscription and myYearbook is paying Command Prompt to setup the
RHEL box for community use.
Sorry that Red Hat was so slow about that :-(
[ various interesting questions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 15:37:17 -0400
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just a follow-up to note that Red Hat has graciously donated a 1
year RHEL subscription and myYearbook is paying Command Prompt to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:11:30 -0400
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I'd vote for people just building private PG installations in
their own home directories. I
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I'd vote for people just building private PG installations in
their own home directories. I am not aware of any performance-testing
reason why we'd want a shared installation, and given that people are
likely
Tom Lane wrote:
FWIW, it's looking like Red Hat will donate a RHEL/RHN subscription if
we want one, though I don't have final approval quite yet.
One possible point favoring the use of Centos over RHEL - its a little
easier for community members to reproduce or test any findings...
Let us know when/if and we'll pay command prompt to install the base OS on
the system. All that we're waiting on at this point is the final on the OS.
Gavin
On 7/31/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hey, this is looking like a serious case of Bike
Hi,
On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 01:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Really? Are the compiler options, etc, public?
Certainly. If you doubt it, try comparing pg_config output for the
RHEL and CentOS packages.
As I wrote before, I used PGDG packages for both -- What I'm suspecting
is the other packages
On 7/31/07, Devrim GÜNDÜZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 19:14 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
and RHEL performed much better than CentOS.
Not to be unkind, but I doubt that on an identical configuration.
Since I don't have the permission to distribute the benchmark
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Devrim G?ND?Z wrote:
I have performed a test using OSDL test suite a few months ago on a
system that has:
* 8 x86_64 CPUs @ 3200.263...
and RHEL [4.3] performed much better than CentOS [4.3]
RHEL 4 update 3 included some reworking of the x86_64 kernel, like adding
the
It's actually in Texas, and we have no intention to put a time limit
on its availability. I think the availability will be there as long as
there is use and we're in the Texas data center, which I don't see
ending any time soon.
On 7/31/07, Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin,
I'm
Folks,
Hey, this is looking like a serious case of Bike Shedding. That is, a dozen
people are arguing about what color to paint the bike shed instead of getting
it built.[1]
Given that there are much more substantial issues: what performance software
to install and how to install it, how to
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hey, this is looking like a serious case of Bike Shedding. That is, a
dozen
people are arguing about what color to paint the bike shed instead of getting
it built.[1]
FWIW, it's looking like Red Hat will donate a RHEL/RHN subscription if
we want one,
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Josh Berkus wrote:
That is, a dozen people are arguing about what color to paint the bike
shed instead of getting it built.
Until there's an OS installed on it and it's on a network, the machine
essentially doesn't exist--so there was no way to work on the
building--and
Tom,
FWIW, it's looking like Red Hat will donate a RHEL/RHN subscription if
we want one, though I don't have final approval quite yet.
Great. Any chance of a machine? Can RH exert some leverage with Dell?
We could use up to 8 servers for performance testing, so I'm asking
everyone.
--
Hi,
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 20:22 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I'm checking into this, but it may take a few days to get an answer
(particularly since I'm planning to take Friday through Monday off).
Well if we go RHEL why not CentOS5 and just call it good?
...because RHEL and CentOS are
Devrim GÜNDÜZ wrote:
Hi,
RHEL has better performance than CentOS -- I guess it is the compiler
options that Red Hat is using while compiling their RPMs.
I have performed a test using OSDL test suite a few months ago on a
system that has:
* 8 x86_64 CPUs @ 3200.263
* 16 Gigabytes of RAM
*
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 19:14 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
and RHEL performed much better than CentOS.
Not to be unkind, but I doubt that on an identical configuration.
Since I don't have the permission to distribute the benchmark results, I
will be happy to spend time for re-running
Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 19:14 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
and RHEL performed much better than CentOS.
Not to be unkind, but I doubt that on an identical configuration.
Each test took 1-2 days -- I will insist that CentOS performs
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 23:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Each test took 1-2 days -- I will insist that CentOS performs poorer
than RHEL.
I'm finding that hard to believe too.
I have felt the same, that's why I repeated the test twice.
There isn't any secret sauce in the RHEL build process
Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 23:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
There isn't any secret sauce in the RHEL build process
Really? Are the compiler options, etc, public?
Certainly. If you doubt it, try comparing pg_config output for the RHEL
and
will be
performed by a well trained NOC monkey. *cough*
On 7/25/07, Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Original Message ---
From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25/07/07, 18:54:50
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Machine available for community use
Another fairly big
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Gregory Stark wrote:
Does gentoo these days have binary packages? source packages do implicitly
require custom builds...
You can install with binaries now so it doesn't take forever to get started,
but the minute you're
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
IMO, a multiboot is o.k. but a vm isn't worth it. This box is big enough to
actually starting looking at SMP and I/O issues for PostgreSQL that we
normally can't because we don't have access to the hardware in the community.
Certainly agree with
* Joshua D. Drake ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Personally, I think CentOS 5 is probably the most reasonable choice. It is
what (or RHEL 5 which is the same) a good portion of our community is going
to be running. It is also easy to work with.
Another alternative would be Debian or Ubuntu
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Really there's a pretty good argument for having several different OS'es
available on the box --- I wonder whether Gavin is up to managing some
sort of VM or multiboot setup.
IMO, a multiboot is o.k. but a vm isn't
Tom Lane wrote:
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Really there's a pretty good argument for having several different OS'es
available on the box --- I wonder whether Gavin is up to managing some
sort of VM or multiboot setup.
IMO, a multiboot is o.k. but a vm isn't worth it. This box is
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But this is pushing forward PostgreSQL development you're doing here. If
you've got a problem such that something works differently based on the
order in which you built the packages, which is going to be unique to
every Linux distribution already, that
Let me look at what makes sense there, I am open to it.
On 7/26/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But this is pushing forward PostgreSQL development you're doing here. If
you've got a problem such that something works differently based on the
order
Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Really there's a pretty good argument for having several different OS'es
available on the box --- I wonder whether Gavin is up to managing some
sort of VM or multiboot setup.
IMO, a multiboot is o.k. but a vm isn't worth it.
Yeah,
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007, Gregory Stark wrote:
So for me to reproduce your [Gentoo] environment you would have to send
me the complete history of what packages you installed. I would have to
reproduce the entire history including installing and building
intermediate versions.
If one's goal is to
Recently I've been involved in or overheard discussions about SMP
scalability at both the PA PgSQL get together and in some list
traffic.
myYearbook.com would ike to make one of our previous production
machines available to established PgSQL Hackers who don't have access
to this level of
If you're interested in using the box, name what you want installed.
On 7/25/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm currently in the process of having Gentoo linux reinstalled on the
box since that is what I am most comfortable administering from a
On 7/25/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm currently in the process of having Gentoo linux reinstalled on the
box since that is what I am most comfortable administering from a
security perspective. If this will be a blocker for developers who
Note it's a 28 disk system, and I can allocate more if needed, but I
was going to use one MSA for internal use.
On 7/25/07, Mark Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/25/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm currently in the process of having Gentoo
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm currently in the process of having Gentoo linux reinstalled on the
box since that is what I am most comfortable administering from a
security perspective. If this will be a blocker for developers who
would actually work on it, please let me know.
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're interested in using the box, name what you want installed.
Personally I use Fedora, but that's because of where I work ;-).
I have no objection to some other distro so long as it's one where
other people can duplicate your environment easily (no
Ubuntu server? Slackware? Not a fan of Centos, RHEL or Fedora...
What about on the BSD side of things?
On 7/25/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're interested in using the box, name what you want installed.
Personally I use Fedora, but
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Gavin M. Roy wrote:
Ubuntu server? Slackware? Not a fan of Centos, RHEL or Fedora...
Unless you did a custom intall, using Ubuntu server would expose the
people using your server to the quirks of how the Debian packages for
PostgreSQL differ from other Linux
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 08:50 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
On 7/25/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm currently in the process of having Gentoo linux reinstalled on the
box since that is what I am most comfortable administering from a
security
On 7/25/07, Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 08:50 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
On 7/25/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm currently in the process of having Gentoo linux reinstalled on the
box since that is what I am
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Gentoo always leaves me wondering exactly what I'm running today,
and I think reproducibility is an important attribute for a benchmarking
machine.
At this point, there's enough performance variations even between
individual Linux kernel releases that I'm
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 08:50 -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
On 7/25/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm currently in the process of having Gentoo linux reinstalled on the
box since that is what I am most comfortable administering from a
Greg Smith wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Gavin M. Roy wrote:
Ubuntu server? Slackware? Not a fan of Centos, RHEL or Fedora...
Unless you did a custom intall, using Ubuntu server would expose the
people using your server to the quirks of how the Debian packages for
PostgreSQL differ from
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Unless you did a custom intall, using Ubuntu server would expose the
people using your server to the quirks of how the Debian packages for
PostgreSQL differ from other Linux distributions.
I doubt we'd be doing much work with the distro-installed version
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Gentoo always leaves me wondering exactly what I'm running today,
and I think reproducibility is an important attribute for a benchmarking
machine.
At this point, there's enough performance variations even between
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 14:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps RH could donate us a RHEL/RHN licence for this?
I could ask, if there's consensus we want it.
Please.
It sounded like more
people like Debian, though.
Well, if you don't we probably will go
Tom Lane wrote:
I do essentially all my development work with installations that are
--prefix'd to user directories and started/stopped by hand; it's just
a lot easier to manage a pile of different versions that way. Plus
I never need to become root. Not sure how other developers work,
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If RH can sponsor a license of RHEL I'm inclined to go there.
I'm checking into this, but it may take a few days to get an answer
(particularly since I'm planning to take Friday through Monday off).
regards, tom lane
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
The problem I've got with Gentoo is that it encourages homegrown builds
with randomly-chosen options and compiler switches.
It encourages it, but it certainly doesn't require it. Knowing that this is a
NOC machine,
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Gregory Stark wrote:
Does gentoo these days have binary packages? source packages do implicitly
require custom builds...
You can install with binaries now so it doesn't take forever to get
started, but the minute you're adding/updating you're going to be
building. The
If RH can sponsor a license of RHEL I'm inclined to go there. Not
that it was offered, but I think Dave's suggestion was Tom could field
that for the box if inclined. If I'm wrong, let me know. If that
can't happen, would people prefer CentOS or Ubuntu Server? The people
I'm most concerned
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
The problem I've got with Gentoo is that it encourages homegrown builds
with randomly-chosen options and compiler switches.
It encourages it, but it certainly doesn't require it. Knowing that this
is a NOC machine, I don't think there's going to be a lot
--- Original Message ---
From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25/07/07, 18:54:50
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Machine available for community use
Another fairly big issue is that we need to know whether measurements we
take in August are comparable
Tom Lane wrote:
Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Gentoo always leaves me wondering exactly what I'm running today,
and I think reproducibility is an important attribute for a benchmarking
machine.
At this point, there's enough performance variations
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 19:35 +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
Rats, I've always liked Gentoo. ;)
I'd agree with Tom on that: we need a system that remains the same over
longer periods, not simply a very fast one. I'm OK with Fedora.
fedora is probably not a prime example for stays
Tom Lane wrote:
Gavin M. Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If RH can sponsor a license of RHEL I'm inclined to go there.
I'm checking into this, but it may take a few days to get an answer
(particularly since I'm planning to take Friday through Monday off).
Well if we go RHEL why not CentOS5
Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps RH could donate us a RHEL/RHN licence for this?
I could ask, if there's consensus we want it. It sounded like more
people like Debian, though.
regards, tom lane
---(end of
PROTECTED]
To: Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25/07/07, 18:54:50
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Machine available for community use
Another fairly big issue is that we need to know whether measurements we
take in August are comparable to measurements we take in October, so a
fairly stable platform
Gavin M. Roy wrote:
One thing to take into account is I dont have physical access to the
box (It is in TX, I am in PA). All installs but Gentoo will be
performed by a well trained NOC monkey. *cough*
iLO ?
Stefan
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP
Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps RH could donate us a RHEL/RHN licence for this?
I could ask, if there's consensus we want it. It sounded like more
people like Debian, though.
well a RHEL/RHN licence would not be a bad thing either (and I guess
it's also a fairly
61 matches
Mail list logo
