On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Jordan Tomkinson wrote:
> taken before the ~7000 rows were entered.
>
>relation| size
> ---+
> public.mdl_log| 595 MB
> public.mdl_forum_pos
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> RAID5 outside of RAID 0 is the worst possible RAID level to run with a
> database. (of the commonly used raid level's that is).
>
> It is very, very slow on random writes which is what databases do.
> Switch to RAID 10.
>
surely being (r
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:05 AM, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> * Greg Smith [090201 00:00]:
>
> > Shouldn't someone have ranted about RAID-5 by this point in the thread?
>
> What? Sorry, I wasn't paying attention...
>
> You mean someone's actually still using RAID-5?
>
> ;-)
What exactly is wrong w
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
>
> Right, the useful thing to do in this case is to take a look at how big all
> the relations (tables, indexes) involved are at each of the steps in the
> process. The script at http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Disk_Usage will
> show you that.
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
> well that's pretty normal as the indexes grow large enough to not fit in
>> cache, then not fit in memory, etc...
>>
>
> Right, the useful thing to do in this case is to take a look at how big all
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Jordan Tomkinson
> wrote:
> > As per the spreadsheet
> > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pu_k0R6vNvOVP26TRZdtdYw) CPU
> usage
> > is around 50% and starts climbing over
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Jordan Tomkinson
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Scott Marlowe
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Oh yeah, what OS is this? Version and all that.
Scott,
DB Schema: http://demo.moodle.org/db_schema.txt
SQL Query log: http://demo.moodle.org/querylog.txt
There are _much_ more queries than I anticipated :/
Jordan
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Oh yeah, what OS is this? Version and all that.
>
I should probably clarify that the high cpu only exists while the jmeter
tests are running, once the tests are finished the cpu returns to 0% (this
isnt a production server yet, so no other
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Oh yeah, what OS is this? Version and all that.
>
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.3 x64 kernel 2.6.18-128.el5
os and hardware details are in the google spreadsheet, you might have to
refresh it.
Im working on getting the SQL log for you now.
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> One last thing. You were doing vacuum fulls but NOT reindexing, right?
>
> I quote from the document at google docs:
> 13:50:00vacuum full & analyze on all databases through pgadmin
>
> 1: Do you have evidence that regular autovacuum
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:55 PM, Jordan Tomkinson
> wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > We are running postgresql 8.3.5 and are trying to stress test our LMS.
> > The problem is when our stress tester (Jmeter) insert
help would be appreciated
Regards,
Jordan Tomkinson
System Administrator
Moodle HQ
13 matches
Mail list logo
