Re: [GENERAL] Postgres benchmark?
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, David Siebert wrote: What I would like to try just for my own amusment is to build a small test box. It will not be a server class machine. I am thinking of using an AMD X2 and to start a SATA hard drive. What I did when wanting to run similar experiments was get a moderately expensive RAID controller (Areca ARC-1210, about $300, there are other options) and step up to 3 drives--DB, WAL, and OS (two more cheap ATA drives will set you back another $120). That's just enough to get you benchmark results that translate fairly well to server land. If you don't don't have a controller with a decent write cache on it, there are all kinds of write-heavy tests that you can't get results that mean anything useful on. Then I would like to test different file systems, then different operating systems, different amounts of ram, 32 vs 64 bit, and software raids. Different operating systems is the hard one here. My own tests trying to compare Linux and Solaris on the same hardware gave very different results, and it's a lot of work to get a fair comparison between two platforms like that. A lot of that is not being able to use the same filesystem in the same way; UFS/ZFS are tuned very differently from ext3 for example. When you run database benchmarks, the usual setup is to note what ratio there is between the database and the amount of RAM, because varying the RAM itself is kind of boring. You end up with a curve like http://www.westnet.com/~gsmith/content/postgresql/pgbench-scaling.htm regardless, how much RAM you have just shifts exactly where the inflection points are in an unsurprising way. 32/64, file systems, and software RAID are a bit more useful. A lot of the filesystem/RAID ground has been explored at these two links: http://www.commandprompt.com/blogs/joshua_drake/2008/04/is_that_performance_i_smell_ext2_vs_ext3_on_50_spindles_testing_for_postgresql/ http://merlinmoncure.blogspot.com/2007/08/following-are-results-of-our-testing-of.html I doubt that would ever publish my results. The flame war that would happen would take all the fun out of it for me. I am sure that someone would say that since I wasn't using a server machine that my results where invalid, others would say that I made errors in tuning for the different operating systems or that X would show benefits if I was using a real server machine. What you should do is send out your suggested test plan before you run the tests and get feedback such that you're more likely to get accurate results. There's a lot of useful tests that could be done in this area that are not too hard to design, but the actual follow-through takes a long time. If you wanted to do some of that work, you should be able to get enough help doing that to end up with worthwhile results in the end. -- * Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Re: [GENERAL] Postgres benchmark?
Well that is the rub. I am currently using Postgres everyday. It runs like a champ and even on an old PIII 600 MHZ machine with a single old and slow IDE drive and 256 megs of ram it is fast enough for what we do. This is more for me to do some testing with. I think it would useful as a tunning tool if nothing else. What I would like to try just for my own amusment is to build a small test box. It will not be a server class machine. I am thinking of using an AMD X2 and to start a SATA hard drive. Then I would like to test different file systems, then different operating systems, different amounts of ram, 32 vs 64 bit, and software raids. I would use the same machine for all the tests so it would have a good base line. I doubt that would ever publish my results. The flame war that would happen would take all the fun out of it for me. I am sure that someone would say that since I wasn't using a server machine that my results where invalid, others would say that I made errors in tuning for the different operating systems or that X would show benefits if I was using a real server machine. And all of them may be right. But sometimes you just want to play. Do you want to use PostgreSQL for any particular task? If so, the best benchmark is probably one that simulates your specific workload. Comparing generic benchmark results like pgbench etc may not usefully reflect performance in real-world use with your load and your data. -- Craig Ringer -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Re: [GENERAL] Postgres benchmark?
Craig Ringer wrote: David Siebert wrote: I am interesting in finding a good Postgres benchmark. I an not interested in seeing how fast Postgres is compared to MySql, Firebird, or any other SQL database. What I am interested in is how file systems, memory, and X-64 vs X-32 effects the performance of Postgres. It is more for my own curiosity to be honest. Right now Postgres is more than fast enough for what I am doing. Do you want to use PostgreSQL for any particular task? If so, the best benchmark is probably one that simulates your specific workload. Comparing generic benchmark results like pgbench etc may not usefully reflect performance in real-world use with your load and your data. and If you are running Solaris/OpenSolaris, DTrace is your friend. Mayuresh -- Craig Ringer -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Re: [GENERAL] Postgres benchmark?
David Siebert wrote: I am interesting in finding a good Postgres benchmark. I an not interested in seeing how fast Postgres is compared to MySql, Firebird, or any other SQL database. What I am interested in is how file systems, memory, and X-64 vs X-32 effects the performance of Postgres. It is more for my own curiosity to be honest. Right now Postgres is more than fast enough for what I am doing. Do you want to use PostgreSQL for any particular task? If so, the best benchmark is probably one that simulates your specific workload. Comparing generic benchmark results like pgbench etc may not usefully reflect performance in real-world use with your load and your data. -- Craig Ringer -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
[GENERAL] Postgres benchmark?
I am interesting in finding a good Postgres benchmark. I an not interested in seeing how fast Postgres is compared to MySql, Firebird, or any other SQL database. What I am interested in is how file systems, memory, and X-64 vs X-32 effects the performance of Postgres. It is more for my own curiosity to be honest. Right now Postgres is more than fast enough for what I am doing. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
[GENERAL] Postgres Benchmark
Hello!! I need demostrate that PostgreSQL is a great RDBMS for my undergraduate project, because this, Does somebody has a bechmark (or similar document) between Postgres and others DB (commercial DB's, principally)? Thanks in advance!!
