Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:09 PM, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I chose to use ext3 on these partition
You should really consider another file system. ext3 has two flaws
that mean I can't really use it properly. A 2TB file system size
limit (at least on the servers
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Jesper Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:09 PM, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I chose to use ext3 on these partition
>
> You should really consider another file system. ext3 has
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:19 AM, Scott Marlowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Jesper Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:09 PM, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I chose to use ext3 on
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Jesper Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:09 PM, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> I chose to use ext3 on these partition
> >
> > You should really consider another file system. ext3 has two flaws
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:09 PM, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I chose to use ext3 on these partition
You should really consider another file system. ext3 has two flaws
that mean I can't really use it properly. A 2TB file system size
limit (at least on the servers I've tested) and it loc
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:53 PM, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm ran pgbench from my laptop to the new server
>
> My laptop is dual core with 2 gigs of ram and 1 gig enthernet connection to
> server. so i don't think the network is going to be a problem in the test.
>
> When i look
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 5:14 PM, Leigh Dyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Glyn Astill wrote:
> > Bonie++ benchmarks below.
> >
> > I believe the the Perc 5/i Raid 10 mode is actually a span of mirrors,
> rather than the expected stripe of mirrors we should expect from 1+0, and
> that this is th
James Mansion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Do CREATE TEMP TABLE table have any special treatment regarding eliding
> sync operations
Yes; neither fsync nor WAL-writing is done for temp tables.
> or deferring creation of disk files in the case where memory pressure
> does not require a spill?
Glyn Astill wrote:
Bonie++ benchmarks below.
I believe the the Perc 5/i Raid 10 mode is actually a span of mirrors, rather
than the expected stripe of mirrors we should expect from 1+0, and that this is
the reason for the shitty performance.
Could you build three RAID-1 mirrors on the devic
Do CREATE TEMP TABLE table have any special treatment regarding eliding
sync operations
or deferring creation of disk files in the case where memory pressure
does not require a spill?
James
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your s
- Original Message -
From: "Greg Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Benchmark: Dell/Perc 6, 8 disk RAID 10
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
wal_sync_method = open_sync
The
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
wal_sync_method = open_sync
There was a bug report I haven't had a chance to investigate yet that
suggested some recent Linux versions have issues when using
open_sync. I'd suggest popping that back to the defau
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:01:50 -0400 (EDT)
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Craig James wrote:
>
> >> wal_sync_method = open_sync
>
> There was a bug report I haven't had a chance to investigate yet that
> suggested some r
Absolutely on the battery backup.
I did not load the linux drivers from dell, it works so i figured i was not
going to worry about it. This server is so oversized for its load its
unreal. I have always gone way overboard on server specs and making sure
its redundant.
The difference in our
On 14/03/2008, sathiya psql <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> no other groups are replying.
You waited for a *whole* *hour* before deciding to cross-post?
Wow.
--
Please don't top post, and don't use HTML e-Mail :} Make your quotes concise.
http://www.american.edu/econ/notes/htmlmail.htm
--
S
Bonie++ benchmarks below.
I believe the the Perc 5/i Raid 10 mode is actually a span of mirrors, rather
than the expected stripe of mirrors we should expect from 1+0, and that this is
the reason for the shitty performance.
RAID 5
==
Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Seque
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Craig James wrote:
wal_sync_method = open_sync
There was a bug report I haven't had a chance to investigate yet that
suggested some recent Linux versions have issues when using open_sync.
I'd suggest popping that back to the default for now unless you have time
to reall
Glyn,
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Glyn Astill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm looking at switching out the perc5i (lsi megaraid) cards from our
> Dell 2950s for something else as they're crap at raid 10.
Do you have numbers? Perc 5/i cards perform quite well for us (we have
a 8 disks RAID
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:55:18 -0700
Craig James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Diffs from original configuration:
max_connections = 1000
shared_buffers = 400MB
work_mem = 256MB
max_fsm_pages = 100
max_fsm_relations = 5000
wa
Doug Knight wrote:
All,
I am in the process of specing out a purchase for our production
systems, and am looking at the Dell 2950s as well. I am very interested
to see where this thread goes, and what combinations work with different
application loading types. Our systems will have one pair of
Justin Graf wrote:
I recent just got a new server also from dell 2 weeks ago
went with more memory slower CPU, and smaller harddrives
have not run pgbench
Dell PE 2950 III
2 Quad Core 1.866 Ghz
16 gigs of ram.
8 hard drives 73Gig 10k RPM SAS
2 drives in Mirrored for OS, Binaries, and WAL
6 in a
Craig Ringer wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
No, not at the moment. In principle the planner could look for such
duplicates, but it'd be wasted cycles so much of the time that I'd be
loath to do it.
Good point - there are better places to spend time, and I imagine it'd
be an expensive thing to check
I did not run into one install problem, I read a thread about people having
problems but the thread is over a year old now.
I used the 7.1 gutsy amd64 server version
I then installed gnome desktop because its not installed by default. "i'm a
windows admin i have to have my gui"
then instal
Justin,
This may be a bit out of context, but did you run into any troubles
getting your Perc6i RAID controller to work under Ubuntu 7.1? I've
heard there were issues with that.
Thanks,
Will
On Mar 13, 2008, at 3:11 AM, Justin Graf wrote:
I recent just got a new server also from dell 2
am Thu, dem 13.03.2008, um 18:54:18 +0530 mailte sathiya psql folgendes:
> Is there any tool to draw ER diagram from SQL schema file...
>
14:31 < akretschmer> ??erd
14:31 < rtfm_please> For information about erd
14:31 < rtfm_please> see http://druid.sf.net/
14:31 < rtfm_please> or http://schemas
Is there any tool to draw ER diagram from SQL schema file...
no other groups are replying.
All,
I am in the process of specing out a purchase for our production
systems, and am looking at the Dell 2950s as well. I am very interested
to see where this thread goes, and what combinations work with different
application loading types. Our systems will have one pair of
heartbeat-controlled, d
Hi chaps,
I'm looking at switching out the perc5i (lsi megaraid) cards from our
Dell 2950s for something else as they're crap at raid 10.
Thing is I'm not entirely sure where to start, we're using 6 SAS
drives and also need a bbu cache. The perc5i has 256mb which I'm sure
would be fine for us.
W
I recent just got a new server also from dell 2 weeks ago
went with more memory slower CPU, and smaller harddrives
have not run pgbench
Dell PE 2950 III
2 Quad Core 1.866 Ghz
16 gigs of ram.
8 hard drives 73Gig 10k RPM SAS
2 drives in Mirrored for OS, Binaries, and WAL
6 in a
am Thu, dem 13.03.2008, um 12:51:54 +0530 mailte petchimuthu lingam folgendes:
>
> I have created partial index on a field with conditions, if field _a > 200
> and field_a < 300.
>
> I using the select query with condition as field_a in ( 100, 250, 289, ),
>
> Will it use the index.
Why do
I have created partial index on a field with conditions, if field _a > 200
and field_a < 300.
I using the select query with condition as field_a in ( 100, 250, 289, ),
Will it use the index.
--
With Best Regards,
Petchimuthulingam S
31 matches
Mail list logo
