Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'll do a profile for hte p2 and send post that in an hour or two
Please redo the linux profile after recompiling postmaster.c with
-DLINUX_PROFILE added (I use "make PROFILE='-pg -DLINUX_PROFILE'"
when building for profile on Linux).
reg
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Neil Conway wrote:
>
> Would it be possible to get a profile (e.g. gprof output) for a postgres
> backend executing the query on the Sun machine?
>
Heh. Never thought of doing a profile!
I attached the entire gprof output, but here's the top few functions.
I did the test, 1 b
Well, installing gcc 3.3.1 and using -mcpu=v9 didn't help. in fact it made
things worse. Unless someone has something clever I'm just gonna stop
tinkering with it - my goal was met (it is several orders of magnitude
faster than informix ) and the hardware is being replaced in a month or
two.
than
On 26 Aug 2003 at 8:34, Jeff wrote:
> Could it just be that the sun sucks? (And for the record - same schema,
> nearly same query (modified for datetime syntax) on informix runs in 3
> seconds).
My impression is IPC on sun has higher initial latency than linux. But given
that you also ran the te
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 03:05:12PM -0400, Jeff wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> > I'm still seeing differences in the planner estimates, have you run a VACUUM
> > ANALYZE prior to running these tests?
> >
> I did. I shall retry that.. but the numbers (the cost estimates) are
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> I'm still seeing differences in the planner estimates, have you run a VACUUM
> ANALYZE prior to running these tests?
>
I did. I shall retry that.. but the numbers (the cost estimates) are
pretty close on both. the actual times are very different.
>
I'm still seeing differences in the planner estimates, have you run a VACUUM
ANALYZE prior to running these tests?
Also, are the disk subsystems in these 2 systems the same? You may be seeing
some discrepancies in things spindle speed, U160 vs U320, throughput on
specific RAID controlers, diff
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> Also, after having taken another look at this, you aren't preforming the same
> query on both datasets, so you can't expect them to generate the same
> results, or the same query plans, or even comparable times. Please retry your
> tests with identic
Also, after having taken another look at this, you aren't preforming the same
query on both datasets, so you can't expect them to generate the same
results, or the same query plans, or even comparable times. Please retry your
tests with identical queries , specify the dates, don;t use a function
I spoke with my SUN admin, and this is what he had to say about what you are
seeing.
Sun gear is known to show a lower than Intel performance on light loads, rerun
your test with 100 concurrent users (queries) and see what happens. Also he
recommends installing a 64bit version of Solaris, the
Here's an interesting situation, and I think it may be just that Sun
stinks.
I was recently given the go ahead to switch from Informix to Postgres on
one of our properties. (I had dozens of performance comparisons showing
how slow Informix was compared to it and my boss seeing me struggle trying
11 matches
Mail list logo
