Luke,I hope so. I'll keep you and the list up-to-date as I learn more.SteveOn 8/8/06, Luke Lonergan <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Steve,> I will do that. If it is the general impression that this
> server should perform well with Postgresql, Are the RAID> cards, the 6i and 642 sufficient to your knowl
Steve,
> I will do that. If it is the general impression that this
> server should perform well with Postgresql, Are the RAID
> cards, the 6i and 642 sufficient to your knowledge? I am
> wondering if it is the disc array itself.
I think that is the question to be answered by HP support. Ask
Luke,I will do that. If it is the general impression that this server should perform well with Postgresql, Are the RAID cards, the 6i and 642 sufficient to your knowledge? I am wondering if it is the disc array itself.
SteveOn 8/8/06, Luke Lonergan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Steve,At the end of th
Steve,
At the end of the day it seems that you've got a support issue with the
SmartArray RAID adapter from HP.
Last I tried that I found that they don't write the cciss driver, don't
test it for performance on Linux and don't make any claims about it's
performance on Linux.
That said - can you
Luke,I check dmesg one more time and I found this regarding the cciss driver:Filesystem "cciss/c1d0p1": Disabling barriers, not supported by the underlying device.Don't know if it means anything, but thought I'd mention it.
SteveOn 8/8/06, Steve Poe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Luke,I thought so. In
I have unlimited rack space, so 2U is not the issue. The boxes are stored in
our lab for internal software tools. I'm going to research those boxes you
mention. Regarding the JBOD enclosures, are these generally just 2U or 4U
units with SCSI interface connectors? I didn't see these types of boxe
Luke,I thought so. In my test, I tried to be fair/equal since my Sun box has two 4-disc arrays each on their own channel. So, I just used one of them which should be a little slower than the 6-disc with 192MB cache.
Incidently, the two internal SCSI drives, which are on the 6i adapter, generated a
With such a budget you should easily be able to get something like:
- A 1U high-performance server (for instance the Dell 1950 with 2x
Woodcrest 5160, 16GB of FB-Dimm memory, one 5i and one 5e perc raid
controller and some disks internally)
- An external SAS direct attached disks storage enclosu
Steve,
> > Are any of the disks not healthy? Do you see any I/O
> errors in dmesg?
>
> In my vmstat report, I it is an average per minute not
> per-second. Also, I found that in the first minute of the
> very first run, the HP's "bi"
> value hits a high of 221184 then it tanks after that.
B
Steve,
> Sun box with 4-disc array (4GB RAM. 4 167GB 10K SCSI RAID10
> LSI MegaRAID 128MB). This is after 8 runs.
>
> dbserver-dual-opteron-centos,08/08/06,Tuesday,20,us,12,2,5
> dbserver-dual-opteron-centos,08/08/06,Tuesday,20,sy,59,50,53
> dbserver-dual-opteron-centos,08/08/06,Tuesday,20,wa,1
> Are any of the disks not healthy? Do you see any I/O errors in dmesg?
Luke,
In my vmstat report, I it is an average per minute not per-second. Also,
I found that in the first minute of the very first run, the HP's "bi"
value hits a high of 221184 then it tanks after that.
Steve
>Sounds like there are a few moving parts here, one of which is the ODBC>driver.
Yes, I need to use it since my clients use it for their veterinary application.
>First - using 7.4.x postgres is a big variable - not much experience on this>list with 7.4.x anymore.Like the previous, we have to use i
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Alex Turner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
First off - very few third party tools support debian. Debian is a sure
fire way to have an unsupported system. Use RedHat or SuSe (flame me all
you want, it doesn't make it less true).
Yeah, actually, it does
Steve,
On 8/8/06 9:57 AM, "Steve Poe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the Sun box, with 4 discs (RAID10) to one channel on the LSI RAID card, I
> see an average TPS around 70. If I ran this off of one disc, I see an average
> TPS of 32.
>
> on the HP box, with 6-discs in RAID10 and 1 spare. I s
On Aug 8, 2006, at 6:24 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
In which case, which is theoretically better (since I don't have a
convenient test bed at the moment) for WAL in a write-heavy
environment? More disks in a RAID 10 (which should theoretically
improve write throughput in general, to a point
In which case, which is theoretically better (since I don't have a
convenient test bed at the moment) for WAL in a write-heavy environment?
More disks in a RAID 10 (which should theoretically improve write
throughput in general, to a point) or a 2-disk RAID 1? Does it become a
price/performan
On Aug 8, 2006, at 5:28 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Thomas F. O'Connell wrote:
On Aug 8, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I am considering a setup such as this:
- At least dual cpu (possibly with 2 cores each)
- 4GB of RAM
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for root disk
- 4 disk RAID 1+0 a
Thomas F. O'Connell wrote:
On Aug 8, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I am considering a setup such as this:
- At least dual cpu (possibly with 2 cores each)
- 4GB of RAM
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for root disk
- 4 disk RAID 1+0 array for PGDATA
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for pg_xlog
On Aug 8, 2006, at 1:43 PM, Kenji Morishige wrote:
I am considering a setup such as this:
- At least dual cpu (possibly with 2 cores each)
- 4GB of RAM
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for root disk
- 4 disk RAID 1+0 array for PGDATA
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for pg_xlog
Does anyone know a vendor
Great info, which vendor were you looking at for these Opterons? I am goign
to be purchasing 2 of these. :) I do need 24/7 reliability.
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 05:08:29PM -0500, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 15:43, Kenji Morishige wrote:
> > I've asked for some help here a few month
On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 15:43, Kenji Morishige wrote:
> I've asked for some help here a few months ago and got some really helpfull
> answers regarding RAID controllers and server configuration. Up until
> recently I've been running PostgreSQL on a two year old Dual Xeon 3.06Ghz
> machine with a sin
The 1+0 on the WAL is better than on PGDATA? I guess I'm confused about the
write sequence of the data. I will research more, thank you!
-Kenji
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 04:59:09PM -0500, Thomas F. O'Connell wrote:
>
> On Aug 8, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> >>I am considering a set
On Aug 8, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
I am considering a setup such as this:
- At least dual cpu (possibly with 2 cores each)
- 4GB of RAM
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for root disk
- 4 disk RAID 1+0 array for PGDATA
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for pg_xlog
Does anyone know a vendor th
I am considering a setup such as this:
- At least dual cpu (possibly with 2 cores each)
- 4GB of RAM
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for root disk
- 4 disk RAID 1+0 array for PGDATA
- 2 disk RAID 1 array for pg_xlog
Does anyone know a vendor that might be able provide such setup?
I would look
I've asked for some help here a few months ago and got some really helpfull
answers regarding RAID controllers and server configuration. Up until
recently I've been running PostgreSQL on a two year old Dual Xeon 3.06Ghz
machine with a single channel RAID controller (previously Adaptec 2200S, but
n
Patrice Beliveau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> SELECT * FROM TABLE
>>> WHERE TABLE.COLUMN1=something
>>> AND TABLE.COLUMN2=somethingelse
>>> AND function(TABLE.COLUMN3,TABLE.COLUMN4) > 0;
> I find out that the function process every row even if the row should be
> rejected as per the first or t
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 12:49, Patrice Beliveau wrote:
Hi,
I have a query that use a function and some column test to select row.
It's in the form of:
SELECT * FROM TABLE
WHERE TABLE.COLUMN1=something
AND TABLE.COLUMN2=somethingelse
AND function(TABLE.COL
On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 12:49, Patrice Beliveau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a query that use a function and some column test to select row.
> It's in the form of:
>
> SELECT * FROM TABLE
>WHERE TABLE.COLUMN1=something
> AND TABLE.COLUMN2=somethingelse
> AND function(TABLE.COLUMN3,TABLE
Hi,
I have a query that use a function and some column test to select row.
It's in the form of:
SELECT * FROM TABLE
WHERE TABLE.COLUMN1=something
AND TABLE.COLUMN2=somethingelse
AND function(TABLE.COLUMN3,TABLE.COLUMN4) > 0;
The result of the function does NOT depend only from the
Luke,Here's some background:I use Pg 7.4.13 (I've tested as far back as 7.4.8). I use an 8GB data with a program called odbc-bench. I run an 18 minute test. With each run, HP box excluded, I unmount the discs involved, reformat, un-tar the backup of PGDATA and pg_xlog back on the discs, start-up Po
Steve,
On 8/8/06 8:01 AM, "Steve Poe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback. I use the same database test that I've run a Sun
> dual Opteron with 4Gb RAM and (2) four disk arrays in RAID10. The sun box with
> one disc on an LSI MegaRAID 2-channel adapter outperforms this HP box. I
Luke,Thanks for the feedback. I use the same database test that I've run a Sun dual Opteron with 4Gb RAM and (2) four disk arrays in RAID10. The sun box with one disc on an LSI MegaRAID 2-channel adapter outperforms this HP box. I though I was doing something wrong or there is something wrong with
I agree, I think these say you are getting 240MB/s sequential reads and 1000
seeks per second.
That's pretty much the best you'd expect.
- Luke
Sent from my GoodLink synchronized handheld (www.good.com)
-Original Message-
From: Alex Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday,
Alex, Maybe I mis-stated, this is a 6-disk array.SteveOn 8/7/06, Alex Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:These number are pretty darn good for a four disk RAID 10, pretty close to perfect infact. Nice advert for the 642 - I guess we have a Hardware RAID controller than will read indpendently from m
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ruben Rubio):
> Hi, I have a question with shared_buffer.
>
> Ok, I have a server with 4GB of RAM
> -
> # cat /proc/meminfo
> MemTotal: 4086484 kB
> [...]
> -
>
> So, if I want to, for example, shared_buffer to take 3 GB of RAM then
> shared_buffer would be 393
On Aug 5, 2006, at 7:10 PM, Steve Poe wrote:
Has anyone worked with server before. I've read the SmartArray 6i is a
poor performer, I wonder if the SmartArray 642 adapter would have the
same fate?
My newest db is a DL385, 6 disks. It runs very nicely. I have no
issues with the 6i controll
Alvaro,
* Alex Turner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The other thing is you will probably want to turn on stats in postgres to
> figure out which queries are the bad ones (does anyone have good docs posted
> for this?). Once you have identified the bad queries, you can explain
> analyze them, and f
* Alex Turner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> First off - very few third party tools support debian. Debian is a sure
> fire way to have an unsupported system. Use RedHat or SuSe (flame me all
> you want, it doesn't make it less true).
Yeah, actually, it does make it less true since, well, it's rea
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi, I have a question with shared_buffer.
Ok, I have a server with 4GB of RAM
- -
# cat /proc/meminfo
MemTotal: 4086484 kB
[...]
- -
So, if I want to, for example, shared_buffer to take 3 GB of RAM then
shared_buffer would be 393216 (3 *
Hello
I have pg_autovacuum running with the arguments:
pg_autovacuum -D -s 120 -v 1
the database is postgresql 8.0.0
Sometimes load average on server raises to 20 and it is almost impossible to
login via SSH
When I'm logging in finally, I see there is cpu usage: 6% and iowait 95%
ps ax |
40 matches
Mail list logo
