On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> FWIW, EnterpriseDB's "InfiniCache" provides the same caching benefit. The
>> way that works is when PG goes to evict a page from shared buffers that page
>> gets compressed and stuffed into a memcache cluster. When PG determines that
>> a
- Original Message -
> From: Josh Berkus
> To: postgres performance list
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2011 2:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] amazon ec2
> So memcached basically replaces the filesystem?
>
> That sounds cool, but I'm wondering if it'
On Wed, 4 May 2011, Josh Berkus wrote:
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 17:02:53 -0700
From: Josh Berkus
To: postgres performance list
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] amazon ec2
FWIW, EnterpriseDB's "InfiniCache" provides the same caching benefit. The way
that works is when PG goes to ev
> FWIW, EnterpriseDB's "InfiniCache" provides the same caching benefit. The way
> that works is when PG goes to evict a page from shared buffers that page gets
> compressed and stuffed into a memcache cluster. When PG determines that a
> given page isn't in shared buffers it will then check tha
On 05/03/2011 01:48 PM, Joel Reymont wrote:
What are the best practices for setting up PG 9.x on Amazon EC2 to
get the best performance?
Use EC2 and other Amazon hosting for cloud-based client access only.
Their shared disk services are universally despised by basically
everyone who has trie
On May 3, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> I've also seen over a 20:1 speedup over PostgreSQL by using Greenplum's free
> Community Edition server, in situations where its column store + compression
> features work well on the data set. That's easiest with an append-only
> workload, and th
Greg Spiegelberg wrote:
I ran pgbench tests late last year comparing EC2, GoGrid, a 5 year-old
lab server and a new server. Whether I used a stock postgresql.conf
or tweaked, the current 8.4 or 9.0, or varied the EC2 instance size
EC2 was always at the bottom ranging from 409.834 to 693.100 tp
Mark Rostron wrote:
the success/failure of it depends on your typical query activity, the
size of your critical result set, and whether you are able to get
enough RAM to make this work.
Basically, it all comes down to "does the working set of data I access
frequently fit in RAM?" If it does,
On 5/3/11 11:48 AM, Joel Reymont wrote:
> What are the best practices for setting up PG 9.x on Amazon EC2 to get the
> best performance?
Yes. Don't use EC2.
There is no "best" performance on EC2. There's not even "good
performance". Basically, EC2 is the platform for when performance
doesn't
Lang
On Tue, 3 May 2011, Alan Hodgson wrote:
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 13:09:51 -0700
From: Alan Hodgson
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] amazon ec2
On May 3, 2011 12:43:13 pm you wrote:
On May 3, 2011, at 8:41 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
I am also interested in tips for
iowait is a problem on any platform that relies on spinning media, compared
to RAM.
no matter how fast a disk is, and no matter how intelligent the controller
is, you are still dealing with an access speed differential of 10^6 (speed
of disk access compared to memory access).
i have had good result
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> On May 3, 2011 12:43:13 pm you wrote:
> > On May 3, 2011, at 8:41 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> > > I am also interested in tips for this. EBS seems to suck pretty bad.
> >
> > Alan, can you elaborate? Are you using PG on top of EBS?
> >
>
> Tryin
On May 3, 2011 12:43:13 pm you wrote:
> On May 3, 2011, at 8:41 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> > I am also interested in tips for this. EBS seems to suck pretty bad.
>
> Alan, can you elaborate? Are you using PG on top of EBS?
>
Trying to, yes.
Let's see ...
EBS volumes seem to vary in speed. Some
On May 3, 2011, at 8:41 PM, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> I am also interested in tips for this. EBS seems to suck pretty bad.
Alan, can you elaborate? Are you using PG on top of EBS?
--
- for hire: mac osx device driver ninja, ker
On May 3, 2011 11:48:35 am Joel Reymont wrote:
> What are the best practices for setting up PG 9.x on Amazon EC2 to get the
> best performance?
>
I am also interested in tips for this. EBS seems to suck pretty bad.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
T
What are the best practices for setting up PG 9.x on Amazon EC2 to get the best
performance?
Thanks in advance, Joel
--
- for hire: mac osx device driver ninja, kernel extensions and usb drivers
-
16 matches
Mail list logo
