Re: [PERFORM] Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen

2015-02-12 Thread Luis Antonio Dias de Junior
For me 12000 tps until now

 24 core, 150 Gb ram
- 5 ssd raid 5
- Debian 7.8
- Postgres 9.3.5

...with Postgres parameters customized:

- checkpoint_segments 1000
- checkpoint_completion_target 0.9
- wal_buffers  256MB
- shared_buffers 31 gb
- max_connections 500
- effective_io_concurrency 15

..and finally pgbench parameters

- scale 350
- clients 300
- threads 30
- 60 seconds test run time
Em 10/02/2015 22:32, Mark Kirkwood mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz
escreveu:

 On 10/02/15 10:29, Gavin Flower wrote:

 On 10/02/15 08:30, Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior wrote:

 Hi,

 A survay: with pgbench using TPS-B, what is the maximum TPS you're
 ever seen?

 For me: 12000 TPS.

 --
 Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior

 Important to specify:

 1. O/S
 2. version of PostgreSQL
 3. PostgreSQL configuration
 4. hardware configuration
 5. anything else that might affect performance

 I suspect that Linux will out perform Microsoft on the same hardware,
 and optimum configuration for both O/S's...



 Yes, exactly - and also the pgbench parameters:

 - scale
 - number of clients
 - number of threads
 - statement options (prepared or simple etc)
 - length of test

 We've managed to get 4 to 6 TPS on some pretty serious hardware:

 - 60 core, 1 TB ram
 - 16 SSD + 4 PCIe SSD storage
 - Ubuntu 14.04
 - Postgres 9.4 (beta and rc)

 ...with Postgres parameters customized:

 - checkpoint_segments 1920
 - checkpoint_completion_target 0.8
 - wal_buffers  256MB
 - wal_sync_method open_datasync
 - shared_buffers 10GB
 - max_connections 600
 - effective_io_concurrency 10

 ..and finally pgbench parameters

 - scale 2000
 - clients 32, 64, 128, 256 (best results at 32 and 64 generally)
 - threads = 1/2 client number
 - prepared option
 - 10 minute test run time

 Points to note, we did *not* disable fsync or prevent buffers being
 actually written (common dirty tricks in benchmarks). However, as others
 have remarked - raw numbers mean little. Pgbench is very useful for testing
 how tuning configurations are helping (or not) for a particular hardware
 and software setup, but is less useful for answering the question how many
 TPS can postgres do...

 Regards

 Mark





 --
 Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
 To make changes to your subscription:
 http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance



Re: [PERFORM] Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen

2015-02-10 Thread Luis Antonio Dias de Junior
No problem with this. If anyone want to specify more details.

But I want to know how far postgres can go. No matter OS or other variables.

Gavin, you got more than 12000 TPS?

2015-02-09 19:29 GMT-02:00 Gavin Flower gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz:

 On 10/02/15 08:30, Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior wrote:

 Hi,

 A survay: with pgbench using TPS-B, what is the maximum TPS you're ever
 seen?

 For me: 12000 TPS.

 --
 Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior

 Important to specify:

 1. O/S
 2. version of PostgreSQL
 3. PostgreSQL configuration
 4. hardware configuration
 5. anything else that might affect performance

 I suspect that Linux will out perform Microsoft on the same hardware, and
 optimum configuration for both O/S's...


 Cheers,
 Gavin


 --
 Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
 To make changes to your subscription:
 http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance




-- 
Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior


[PERFORM] Survey: Max TPS you've ever seen

2015-02-09 Thread Luis Antonio Dias de Junior
Hi,

A survay: with pgbench using TPS-B, what is the maximum TPS you're ever
seen?

For me: 12000 TPS.

-- 
Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior