Hi Georg, Your answer I believe has revealed the real problem. I looked at the specification of my SATA SSD, and from my SAS HDD, I saw that the SAS has 12 Gb/s versus 6 Gb/s from the SSD SSD: Samsung 500 GB SATA III 6Gb/s - Model: 850 Evo http://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/minisite/ssd/product/consumer/850evo/ HDD: HPE 300GB 12G SAS Part-Number: 737261-B21 https://h20195.www2.hpe.com/v2/GetPDF.aspx%2Fc04111744.pdf I saw that the SAS band is double, and because of that reason the difference in performance occurred. Another question, if I compare the disk below HDD SAS that has a transfer rate of 6Gb/s equal to the SSD SATA 6Gb/s, do you think the SSD would be more agile in this case? HDD: HP 450GB 6G SAS 15K rpm LFF (3.5-inch) Part-Number: 652615-B21 best Regards Neto 2018-01-15 16:32 GMT-02:00 Georg H. <georg-h@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > Hello Neto > > Am 14.01.2018 um 21:44 schrieb Neto pr: >> >> Dear all >> >> Someone help me analyze the two execution plans below (Explain ANALYZE >> used), is the query 9 of TPC-H benchmark [1]. >> I'm using a server HP Intel Xeon 2.8GHz/4-core - Memory 8GB HDD SAS 320GB >> 15 Krpm AND SSD Sansung EVO 500GB. >> My DBMS parameters presents in postgresql.conf is default, but in SSD I >> have changed random_page_cost = 1.0. >> > you are comparing a SAS Drive against a SATA SSD. Their interfaces serve a > completely different bandwidth. > While a SAS-3 device does 12 Gbit/s SATA-3 device is only able to transfer > 6 Gbit/s (a current SAS-4 reaches 22.5 Gbit/s) > Do a short research on SAS vs SATA and then use a SAS SSD for comparison :) > > regards > Georg >
