Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 02:15:31PM -0800, Jeff Frost wrote:
> When benchmarking various options for a new PG server at one of my clients, 
> I tried ext2 and ext3 (data=writeback) for the WAL and it appeared to be 
> fastest to have ext2 for the WAL.  The winning time was 157m46.713s for 
> ext2, 159m47.098s for combined ext3 data/xlog and 158m25.822s for ext3 
> data=writeback.  This was on an 8x150GB Raptor RAID10 on an Areca 1130 w/ 
> 1GB BBU cache.  This config benched out faster than a 6disk RAID10 + 2 disk 
> RAID1 for those of you who have been wondering if the BBU write back cache 
> mitigates the need for separate WAL (at least on this workload).  Those are 
> the fastest times for each config, but ext2 WAL was always faster than the 
> other two options.  I didn't test any other filesystems in this go around.

Uh, if I'm reading this correctly, you're saying that WAL on a separate
ext2 vs. one big ext3 with data=writeback saved ~39 seconds out of
~158.5 minutes, or 0.4%? Is that even above the noise for your
measurements? I suspect the phase of the moon might play a bigger role
;P
-- 
Jim Nasby                                            jim@xxxxxxxxx
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux