Re: Testing Sandforce SSD
От | Yeb Havinga |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4C4D53DA.3070909@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD (Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Yeb Havinga wrote: > Greg Smith wrote: >> Put it on ext3, toggle on noatime, and move on to testing. The >> overhead of the metadata writes is the least of the problems when >> doing write-heavy stuff on Linux. > I ran a pgbench run and power failure test during pgbench with a 3 > year old computer > On the same config more tests. scale 10 read only and read/write tests. note: only 240 s. starting vacuum...end. transaction type: SELECT only scaling factor: 10 query mode: prepared number of clients: 10 duration: 240 s number of transactions actually processed: 8208115 tps = 34197.109896 (including connections establishing) tps = 34200.658720 (excluding connections establishing) yeb@client45:~$ pgbench -c 10 -l -M prepared -T 240 test starting vacuum...end. transaction type: TPC-B (sort of) scaling factor: 10 query mode: prepared number of clients: 10 duration: 240 s number of transactions actually processed: 809271 tps = 3371.147020 (including connections establishing) tps = 3371.518611 (excluding connections establishing) ---------- scale 300 (just fits in RAM) read only and read/write tests pgbench -c 10 -M prepared -T 300 -S test starting vacuum...end. transaction type: SELECT only scaling factor: 300 query mode: prepared number of clients: 10 duration: 300 s number of transactions actually processed: 9219279 tps = 30726.931095 (including connections establishing) tps = 30729.692823 (excluding connections establishing) The test above doesn't really test the drive but shows the CPU/RAM limit. pgbench -c 10 -l -M prepared -T 3600 test starting vacuum...end. transaction type: TPC-B (sort of) scaling factor: 300 query mode: prepared number of clients: 10 duration: 3600 s number of transactions actually processed: 8838200 tps = 2454.994217 (including connections establishing) tps = 2455.012480 (excluding connections establishing) ------ scale 2000 pgbench -c 10 -M prepared -T 300 -S test starting vacuum...end. transaction type: SELECT only scaling factor: 2000 query mode: prepared number of clients: 10 duration: 300 s number of transactions actually processed: 755772 tps = 2518.547576 (including connections establishing) tps = 2518.762476 (excluding connections establishing) So the test above tests the random seek performance. Iostat on the drive showed a steady just over 4000 read io's/s: avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 11.39 0.00 13.37 60.40 0.00 14.85 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 0.00 4171.00 0.00 60624.00 0.00 29.07 11.81 2.83 0.24 100.00 sdb 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 pgbench -c 10 -l -M prepared -T 24000 test starting vacuum...end. transaction type: TPC-B (sort of) scaling factor: 2000 query mode: prepared number of clients: 10 duration: 24000 s number of transactions actually processed: 30815691 tps = 1283.979098 (including connections establishing) tps = 1283.980446 (excluding connections establishing) Note the duration of several hours. No long waits occurred - of this last test the latency png is at http://yfrog.com/f/0vlatencywp/ and the TPS graph at http://yfrog.com/f/b5tpsp/ regards, Yeb Havinga
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:
Предыдущее
От: Craig RingerДата:
Сообщение: Re: Big difference in time returned by EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT ... AND SELECT ...
Следующее
От: Vitalii TymchyshynДата:
Сообщение: Re: Big difference in time returned by EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT ... AND SELECT ...