Well, I keep failing to send an email with an attachment. Do I need a moderator's approval? Yes, running on VMs and a lower bin processor. With the virtualization overhead, etc., I figure we would be running right around 2/3 of the Dell throughput if we were running the same DBMS. I sent the following message twice today with attachments (postgresql.conf, etc.), and it hasn't been posted yet. Here it is without an attachment. **************************************************** From: Reza Taheri Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 11:34 AM To: 'Craig Ringer' Cc: pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Robert Haas Subject: RE: The need for clustered indexes to boost TPC-V performance OK, some config details. We are using: * Two blades of an HP BladeSystem c-Class c7000 with 2-socket Intel E5520 (Nehalem-EP) processors and 48GB of memory per blade o 8 cores, 16 threads per blade o 48GB of RAM per blade * Storage was an EMC VNX5700 with 14 SSDs fronting 32 15K RPM drives * The Tier B database VM was alone on a blade with 16 vCPUs, 40GB of memory, 4 virtual drives with various RAID levels * The driver and Tier A VMs were on the second blade o So we set PGHOST on the client system to point to the server * RHEL 6.1 * PostgreSQL 8.4 * unixODBC 2.3.2 We stuck with PGSQL 8.4 since it is the stock version shipped with RHEL 6. I am building a new, larger testbed, and will switch to PGSQL 9 with that. Postgres.conf is attached. Thanks, Reza > -----Original Message----- > From: Andy Colson [mailto:andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 5:42 PM > To: Samuel Gendler > Cc: Reza Taheri; Robert Klemme; pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: The need for clustered indexes to boost TPC-V > performance > > On 07/05/2012 03:52 PM, Samuel Gendler wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Reza Taheri <rtaheri@xxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:rtaheri@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > > > > > I provided more config details in an earlier email.____ > > > > __ __ > > > > > > > > I hate to disagree, but unless I didn't get a message sent to the list, you > haven't provided any details about your postgresql config or otherwise > adhered to the guidelines for starting a discussion of a performance > problem around here. I just searched my mailbox and no email from you > has any such details. Several people have asked for them, including myself. > You say you will give any details we want, but this is at least the 3rd or 4th > request for such details and they have not yet been forthcoming. > > > Reza, I went back and looked myself. I see no specs on OS, or hardware.... > unless you mean this: > > > > http://bit.ly/QeWXhE. This was run on a similar server, and the database > size is close to ours. > > > You're running on windows then? Server is 96Gig ram, 8 cores, (dell > poweredge T610). > with two powervault MD1120 NAS's? > > But then I assume you were not running on that, were you. You were > running vmware on it, probably? > > > -Andy -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
