On 25/09/14 01:03, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
With pg_test_timing I can see, that overhead is 48 nsec on my server and 32
nsec on the laptop.
what makes this difference and have it any influence on the overall performance?
Hmm - 22 nsec for my workstation, so while it could be a factor, your
> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> > To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan" , "Merlin Moncure" <
> mmonc...@gmail.com>
> > Cc: "postgres performance list"
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 12:04:12 PM
> > Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs
"Merlin Moncure"
>
> Cc: "postgres performance list"
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 12:04:12 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On 24/09/14 21:23, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
> > Hi Merlin et al.
> >
> > after buildi
On 24/09/14 21:23, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
Hi Merlin et al.
after building postgres 9.4 myself from sources I get the same performance as
with 9.3. The difference was in the value of debug_assertions setting.
Now the next step. Why my 3 years old laptop gets x1.8 times more tps than my
one mo
ot; , "postgres performance
> list"
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 4:21:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
> wrote:
> > Hi Merlin,
> >
> > you are right, in 9.4 the debug_asserti
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
wrote:
> Hi Merlin,
>
> you are right, in 9.4 the debug_assertions are on:
>
> # /etc/init.d/postgresql-9.4 start
> Starting postgresql-9.4 service: [ OK ]
> # psql -U postgres
> psql (9.4beta2)
> Type "help" for help.
es performance
> list"
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 3:37:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Mark Kirkwood
> wrote:
> > On 19/09/14 19:24, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >&g
;Merlin Moncure" , "postgres performance list"
>>>
>>> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 8:26:27 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>>>
>>> On 19/09/14 17:53, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>&
On 19/09/14 19:24, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Kirkwood"
To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
Cc: "Merlin Moncure" , "postgres performance list"
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 8:26:27 AM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9
On 19/09/14 19:24, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Kirkwood"
To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
Cc: "Merlin Moncure" , "postgres performance list"
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 8:26:27 AM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
> Cc: "Merlin Moncure" , "postgres performance list"
>
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 8:26:27 AM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9
On 19/09/14 17:53, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Kirkwood"
Further to the confusion, here's my 9.3 vs 9.4 on two M550 (one for 9.3
one for 9.4), see below for results.
I'm running xfs on them with trim/discard enabled:
$ mount|grep pg
/dev/sdd4 on /mnt
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
> Cc: "Merlin Moncure" , "postgres performance list"
>
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 12:49:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
&g
56:36 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
On 19/09/14 08:32, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
wrote:
9.3.5:
0.035940END;
9.4beta2:
0.957854END;
time being spent on 'END' is definitely sug
On 19/09/14 09:10, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Kirkwood"
To: "Merlin Moncure" , "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
Cc: "postgres performance list"
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:56:36 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgre
e list"
> > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:56:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
> >
> > On 19/09/14 08:32, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
> > > wrote:
> &
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
>> To: "Merlin Moncure" , "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
>>
>> Cc: "postgres performance list"
>> Sent: Thu
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> To: "Merlin Moncure" , "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
>
> Cc: "postgres performance list"
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:56:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
- Original Message -
> From: "Merlin Moncure"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
> Cc: "postgres performance list"
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:32:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at
On 19/09/14 08:32, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
wrote:
9.3.5:
0.035940END;
9.4beta2:
0.957854END;
time being spent on 'END' is definitely suggesting i/o related issues.
This is making me very skeptical that post
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
wrote:
>
> 9.3.5:
> 0.035940END;
>
>
> 9.4beta2:
> 0.957854END;
time being spent on 'END' is definitely suggesting i/o related issues.
This is making me very skeptical that postgres is the source of the
problem.
September 18, 2014 7:54:24 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
> >>
> >> On 09/18/2014 08:09 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
> >>>>> 9.4beta2:
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>
On 09/18/2014 03:09 PM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Josh Berkus"
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 7:54:24 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
On 09/18/2014 08:09 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
- Original Message -
> From: "Josh Berkus"
> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 7:54:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On 09/18/2014 08:09 AM, Mkrtchyan,
On 09/18/2014 08:09 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>>> 9.4beta2:
>>> > >
>> > ...
>> >
>>> > > 0.957854END;
>>> > >
>> >
>> > Looks like IO.
> Postgres internal IO? May be. We get 600MB/s on this SSDs.
While it's possible that this is a Postgres issue, my first thought is
that the
- Original Message -
> From: "Jeff Janes"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan"
> Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 4:56:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Mkrt
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>
>
> Hi Folk,
>
> I am trying to investigate some performance issues which we have with
> postgres
> (a different topic by itself) and tried postgres.9.4beta2, with a hope
> that it
> perform better.
>
> Turned out that 9.4 is 2x slower t
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Kirkwood"
> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan" ,
> pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 12:17:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>
> On 18/09/14 21:58, Mkrtchyan, Tigran
On 18/09/14 21:58, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
Hi Folk,
I am trying to investigate some performance issues which we have with postgres
(a different topic by itself) and tried postgres.9.4beta2, with a hope that it
perform better.
Turned out that 9.4 is 2x slower than 9.3.5 on the same hardware.
Hi Folk,
I am trying to investigate some performance issues which we have with postgres
(a different topic by itself) and tried postgres.9.4beta2, with a hope that it
perform better.
Turned out that 9.4 is 2x slower than 9.3.5 on the same hardware.
Some technical details:
Host: rhel 6.5 2.
30 matches
Mail list logo