Hongtao Yin writes:
I ran newer FreeBSD code 8.0 RC1 this time. By using NetPIPE, we collected
Check
man tuning
There are a few parameters there worth exploring.
For example check the section on net.inet.tcp.sendspace and
net.inet.tcp.recvspace
__
Ckcheng writes:
1. rsync
2. tar ..
If this is a migration I find that tar to the local machine, copy over,
restore, then rsync are likely the best options.
In my experience copying lots of small files is going to take a long time,
no matter which method you use.
From all the combinations
György Vilmos writes:
BTW, even on one thread, Linux (2.6.31) performs much better, better means
here 790 TPS vs. 580...
What test did you use to meassure TPS?
That is a pretty big difference.
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Randy Schultz wrote:
>
> - "Andrew Kuriger" spaketh thusly:
>
> |
> | Since the article says that they left the debugging features on I
> | think
> | this has a bit to do with it. Obviously the testers didn't care to
> | read the
> | documentation, and didn't
György Vilmos writes:
I've done a benchmark of recent versions of PostgreSQL's last five major
releases to see how performance has changed during the past years from
version to version.
Thanks!
Very interesting.
Did you share it with the Postgresql list yet?
I think they would find it very int
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:29 AM, István wrote:
> http://marc.info/?l=freebsd-current&m=125413848303229&w=2
>
>
well I didn't knew that fresh one. Nice to know. Gona test for RC too.
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Francisco Reyes >wrote:
>
> > Steven H
Steven Hartland writes:
Just noticed the following posted on phoronix:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=freebsd8_ubuntu910&num=1
Comments?
This was discussed in detail in slashdot.. starting with the fact that most
likely debug switches were not turned off for FreeBSD.
nd invariants... so...
Regards,
Francisco
> Regards
> Steve
>
>
>
> This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the
> person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the
> r
Palle Girgensohn writes:
Sorry, my mistake, more like a percent per day at the moment...
If you have 16GB and you got 1% per day.. in less than 100 days you would be
at 32GB.. If growth continues you will theoretically be at 60GB+ within a
year.
We are planning about 16 GB RAM, actuall
Palle Girgensohn writes:
Presently ~pgsql/data has a 16 GB footprint.
If you can put 4GB or better in your machine you should do well.
Specially since you mentioned you are mostly read with relatively small
amount of writes.
The growth is rather slow, around a percent per week
What cont
Palle Girgensohn writes:
Now, I hear rumors that AMD is to be preferred over Intel for performance
From what I have read in the past, specially in the postgresql list, it
seems the AMD64 cpus do better with Postgresql. Possibly because of better
bus architecture.
Personally I think having
Petri Helenius writes:
The point in threading is that different threads can execute
simultaneously on multiple CPU's.
What combination of FreeBSD+Mysql will have multiple threads run by
different CPUs?
In the few SMP FreeBSD + Mysql setups (mysql 4.X) that I have at work I only
see mysql i
Kris Kennaway writes:
Actually it will help the DB side, when you have multiple simultaneous
transactions - that's the point :)
A little confused.
Does this mean FreeBSD will split the threads into multiple CPUs?
Or you meant the DB will do better because the load from other programs will
be
Steven Hartland writes:
The software we will be running is vBulletin so apache +
php and mysql.
Mysql is thread based. Quadcore will not help the DB side. Will help with
the other components though, if you host everything in the same machine.
___
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Mike Tancsa wrote:
I would for sure check pricing with Areca
Will do.
I think I have a new server we will be making in a few months and thinking
will go with an Areca card card for it.
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Mike Tancsa wrote:
Which 3ware were they comparing ? The 9500SX was a little bit more than the
4 port ARECA here in Canada.
It was the 9500SX.. Don't recall the models for the ARECA, but they
compared it to two.
___
freebsd-per
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Mike Tancsa wrote:
I use the 3ware line (8xxx) and they are very stable, but not the fastest.
For speed, check out the cards from Areca. Native FreeBSD support and
they are FAST
http://www.areca.com.tw/products/html/pcix-sata.htm
Saw a review last night of the Areca
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005, Mike Tancsa wrote:
I use the 3ware line (8xxx) and they are very stable, but not the fastest.
For speed, check out the cards from Areca. Native FreeBSD support and they
are FAST
http://www.areca.com.tw/products/html/pcix-sata.htm
Where did you get your area controller
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Shanker Balan wrote:
See top(1):
m Toggle the display between 'cpu' and 'io' modes.
Thanks for the feedback.
had not had a chace to read lists for weeks..
That does exactly what I need.
My only complain is that once one switches to that mode that the default
sor
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Eric Anderson wrote:
Keep in mind that 5-STABLE, and 6.x (and -CURRENT) have a max of 256 nfsd's,
so if you want to go higher, you have to modify a line in nfsd.c.
So far only a handfull of clients are expected. I am going to start at 10.
:-)
Other than "killall -9 nfsd
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Eric Anderson wrote:
Use the -n flag to nfsd, so in /etc/rc.conf:
nfs_server_flags="-u -t -n 1024"
Working on the nfs server today.
How about the "-r" flag? It is the default. Is it not needed?
The man page says "-r"
Register the NFS service with rpcbind(8) without creat
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Eric Anderson wrote:
I bought the array here:
http://www.acnc.com
The biggest RAID-5 we have is on one of those boxes. So far has performed
very well for us.
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Chuck Swiger wrote:
So-so. RAID-5 is okay on a IMAP reader box, it's not so good for a pure SMTP
relay, especially one that does virus scanning.
For our SMTP I think we will have "small" machines with RAID-1
If your DB claims to support a RAID-5
Will check. Will be us
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Eric Anderson wrote:
You should also increase the rsize and wsize parameters on the mount options
for better efficiency.
On the server?
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/fr
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Small writes are pretty much the worst-case scenario for RAID-5,
Such as mail servers?
How about for a DB server which is mostly read only?
normal to see a very significant performance drop-- by up to an order of
magnitude-- from the performance of a b
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Joseph Koshy wrote:
Is there a way to find out which program(s) are causing
the I/O?
ktrace(8); you can use it to trace all descendants of 'init'.
Looking at the man page it's non-obvious how to use it (to me).
Specially it seems one needs to indicate a pid or a comman
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Eric Anderson wrote:
Also, if it is an NFS server, one should check the cpu times on the nfsd
processes. I've found that many times there aren't enough nfsd processes to
take the load from many clients. Increasing the number (double it) often
helps this. The max in 5.3
Looking at vmstat I see the "b" colun never hits zero and it's usually
between 5 and 20.
Is there a way to find out which program(s) are causing the I/O?
In some of the machines it was near trivial to find the culprit, but have
a handfull of machines that I am not sure what the cause of I/O is
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, mariano benedettini wrote:
91.3% idle
CPU is not the problem. :-)
Mem: 1599M Active, 1704M Inact, 311M Wired, 189M Cache, 112M Buf, 14M Free
Swap: 2023M Total, 184K Used, 2023M Free
Swap is not the problem.
Do
vmstat 10
Watch the output.
In particular look at the f
29 matches
Mail list logo
