Hi, Jim,
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Well, if the controller is caching with a BBU, I'm not sure that order
> matters anymore, because the controller should be able to re-order at
> will. Theoretically. :) But this is why having some actual data posted
> somewhere would be great.
Well, actually, the c
Hi,
> Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results
> here?
Do you know if the figures from bonnie++ are able to measure the
performance related to the overhead of the 'fsync' option? I had
very strange performance differences between two Dell 1850
machines months ago,
Hi Dave,
Thanks to reply.
I run it now in a Postgres 8.1.4 my notebook (win XP) and the
performance is really much better:
EXPLAIN ANALYZE
SELECT Contrato.Id
, Min( prog.dtsemeio ) AS DtSemIni
, Max( prog.dtsemeio ) AS DtSemFim
, Min( prog.dtembarque ) AS DtEmbIni
, Max(
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Luiz K. Matsumura
> Well, in this case the queries with LEFT OUTER join and with
> inner join
> returns the same result set. I don´t have the sufficient knowledge to
> affirm , but I suspect that if the query plan used for
Luke,
Thanks for the tips. I'm running FreeBSD 6.1 amd64, but, I can also
enable readahead on the raid controller, and also adaptive readahead.
Here's tests:
Readahead & writeback enabled:
bash-2.05b$ bonnie++ -d bonnie -s 16000:8k
Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential In
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Luiz K. Matsumura
>
>
> Where I can see the current random_page_cost value ? There
> are some hint
> about what value I must set ?
> Thanks in advance.
> Luiz
On Linux the random_page_cost is s
The relevant portion of my sysctl.conf file looks like this:
kernel.shmall = 2097152
kernel.shmmax = 2147483648
kernel.shmmni = 4096
kernel.sem = 250 32000 100 128
fs.file-max = 65536
I understood it was a good idea to set shmmax to half of available
memory (2GB in this case). I assume that I n
I'm in the process of migrating a Paradox 7/BDE 5.01 database from single-user
Paradox to a web based interface to either MySQL or PostgreSQL.
The database is a pedigree sheep breed society database recording sheep and
flocks (amongst other things).
My current problem is with one table and an as
On 16-8-2006 18:48, Peter Hardman wrote:
Using identically structured tables and the same primary key, if I run this on
Paradox/BDE it takes about 120ms, on MySQL (5.0.24, local server) about 3ms,
and on PostgresSQL (8.1.3, local server) about 1290ms). All on the same
Windows XP Pro machine wit
On 8/16/06, Peter Hardman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm in the process of migrating a Paradox 7/BDE 5.01 database from single-user
Paradox to a web based interface to either MySQL or PostgreSQL.
The database is a pedigree sheep breed society database recording sheep and
flocks (amongst other thi
I had enable_seqscan turned OFF; With enable_seqscan turned ON it takes only 6
minutes to complete
the query and not 44minuts like it did with enable_seqscan turned OFF. THANKS
A LOT!
It's still much more slower than MS SQL server but now it has acceptable times.
Sebastián Baioni
--- Tom
On 16 Aug 2006 at 20:02, Arjen van der Meijden wrote:
> On 16-8-2006 18:48, Peter Hardman wrote:
> > Using identically structured tables and the same primary key, if I run this
> > on
> > Paradox/BDE it takes about 120ms, on MySQL (5.0.24, local server) about
> > 3ms,
> > and on PostgresSQL (8
"Peter Hardman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm in the process of migrating a Paradox 7/BDE 5.01 database from
> single-user
> Paradox to a web based interface to either MySQL or PostgreSQL.
> The query I run is:
> /* Select all sheep who's most recent transfer was into the subject flock */
>
Everyone,
I wanted to follow-up on bonnie results for the internal RAID1 which is
connected to the SmartArray 6i. I believe this is the problem, but I am
not good at interepting the results. Here's an sample of three runs:
scsi disc
array ,16G,47983,67,65492,20,37214,6,73785,87,89787,6,578.2,0,16
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 09:34:24AM -0600, Carl Youngblood wrote:
> The relevant portion of my sysctl.conf file looks like this:
>
> kernel.shmall = 2097152
> kernel.shmmax = 2147483648
> kernel.shmmni = 4096
> kernel.sem = 250 32000 100 128
> fs.file-max = 65536
>
> I understood it was a good ide
15 matches
Mail list logo