What extra overhead do you have? Are there any triggers on the table?
Can you run some insert tests on your main table, starting with no
index and adding one index at a time so you can see exactly what the
effect of each index is.
Also what are the specs on your scsi raid? is it 0, 1, 0+1 or 5?
How many drives? which type of scsi, (scsi-II, ultra, wide 160, etc...)
Can you install 7.1beta5 in a separate dir and run a test on that?
Alex.
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Orion Henry wrote:
> adb wrote:
> >
> > Have you done any benchmarks with a prototype of your application.
> >
> > Based off of some of the numbers I've been seeing with my testing,
> > I would not be surprised if a single pIII 1ghz box with a decent disk
> > (ata 100 or scsi 160) would handle the load you describe and is way
> > cheaper than some big smp box. A dual pIII with a decent raid card
> > would get you even farther. Certainly these are not as expandable as
> > other options out there but they are worth a look.
> >
> > What I would be most concered about is a table that grows by a few million
> > rows a week, that to me seems like a liability in itself since
> > maintenance on that table will get pretty slow after a few months.
> >
> > Alex.
>
> Right now I have a prototype running on a dual PIII 533 MHz with a scsi
> raid and I am getting 2 inserts / second maximum. (To be fair there is
> some overhead I did not mention on each insert but not a lot). Now if
> WAL or disabling fsync() can get me a 10x speedup that's 20/second which
> is almost what I need. Perhaps finding a way to drop some of my index's
> and other overhead could get me to 30/second - my minimum.
>
> But yes - it seems that CPU power is the least of my worries. I just
> need really fast disks and 7.1 to come out soon.
>