Hi, Arjen,
On 8-Sep-06, at 1:51 AM, Arjen van der Meijden wrote:
Hi,
We've been running our "webapp database"-benchmark again on mysql
and postgresql. This time using a Fujitsu-Siemens RX300 S3 machine
equipped with a 2.66Ghz Woodcrest (5150) and a 3.73Ghz Dempsey
(5080). And compared those results to our earlier undertaken
Opteron benchmarks on 2.4GHz' Socket F- and 940-versions (2216, 280).
You can see the english translation here:
http://tweakers.net/reviews/646
The Woodcrest is quite a bit faster than the Opterons. Actually...
With Hyperthreading *enabled* the older Dempsey-processor is also
faster than the Opterons with PostgreSQL. But then again, it is the
top-model Dempsey and not a top-model Opteron so that isn't a clear
win.
Of course its clear that even a top-Opteron wouldn't beat the
Dempsey's as easily as it would have beaten the older Xeon's before
that.
Why wouldn't you use a top of the line Opteron ?
Again PostgreSQL shows very good scalability, so good even
HyperThreading adds extra performance to it with 4 cores enabled...
while MySQL in every version we tested (5.1.9 is not displayed, but
showed similar performance) was slower with HT enabled.
Further more we received our ordered Dell MD1000 SAS-enclosure
which has 15 SAS Fujitsu MAX3036RC disks and that unit is
controlled using a Dell PERC 5/e.
We've done some benchmarks (unfortunately everything is in Dutch
for this).
We tested varying amounts of disks in RAID10 (a set of 4,5,6 and 7
2-disk-mirrors striped), RAID50 and RAID5. The interfaces to
display the results are in a google-stylee beta-state, but here is
a list of all benchmarks done:
http://tweakers.net/benchdb/search?query=md1000&ColcomboID=5
Hover over the left titles to see how many disks and in what raid-
level was done. Here is a comparison of 14 disk RAID5/50/10's:
http://tweakers.net/benchdb/testcombo/wide/?TestcomboIDs%5B1156%
5D=1&TestcomboIDs%5B1178%5D=1&TestcomboIDs%5B1176%
5D=1&DB=Nieuws&Query=Keyword
For raid5 we have some graphs:
http://tweakers.net/benchdb/testcombo/1156
Scroll down to see how adding disks improves performance on it. The
Areca 1280 with WD Raptor's is a very good alternative (or even
better) as you can see for most benchmarks, but is beaten as soon
as the relative weight of random-IO increases (I/O-meter fileserver
and database benchmarks), the processor on the 1280 is faster than
the one on the Dell-controller so its faster in sequential IO.
These benchmarks were not done using postgresql, so you shouldn't
read them as absolute for all your situations ;-) But you can get a
good impression I think.
Best regards,
Arjen van der Meijden
Tweakers.net
---------------------------(end of
broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
