Re: [PERFORM] Unexpected pgbench result

2013-12-20 Thread Dave Johansen
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Dave Johansen wrote: > > > Is there a benefit to having the WAL and logs on the separate > > RAID 1? Or is just having them be part of the larger RAID 1+0 > > just as good? > > I once accidentally left the pg_xlog directory on the 40-spind

Re: [PERFORM] Unexpected pgbench result

2013-12-20 Thread Kevin Grittner
Dave Johansen wrote: > Is there a benefit to having the WAL and logs on the separate > RAID 1? Or is just having them be part of the larger RAID 1+0 > just as good? I once accidentally left the pg_xlog directory on the 40-spindle RAID with most of the data instead of moving it.  Results with gra

Re: [PERFORM] Unexpected pgbench result

2013-12-20 Thread Dave Johansen
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote: > On 12/19/2013 04:06 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: > > Right now, we're running a RAID 1 for pg_clog, pg_log and pg_xlog and >> then a RAID 1+0 with 12 disks for the data. Would there be any benefit >> to running a separate RAID 1+0 with a tablespa

Re: [PERFORM] Unexpected pgbench result

2013-12-20 Thread Shaun Thomas
On 12/19/2013 04:06 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: Right now, we're running a RAID 1 for pg_clog, pg_log and pg_xlog and then a RAID 1+0 with 12 disks for the data. Would there be any benefit to running a separate RAID 1+0 with a tablespace for the indexes? Not really. PostgreSQL doesn't currently s

Re: [PERFORM] Unexpected pgbench result

2013-12-19 Thread Dave Johansen
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote: > On 12/19/2013 11:00 AM, Dave Johansen wrote: > > When I run pgbench in "SELECT only" after doing "-i -s 2000" I get what >> appears to be good performance (60k-70k tps) but if I initialize a new >> database with "-i -s 4000" the tps drops to

Re: [PERFORM] Unexpected pgbench result

2013-12-19 Thread Shaun Thomas
On 12/19/2013 11:00 AM, Dave Johansen wrote: When I run pgbench in "SELECT only" after doing "-i -s 2000" I get what appears to be good performance (60k-70k tps) but if I initialize a new database with "-i -s 4000" the tps drops to 4k-7k. Is this order of magnitude drop expected? Or is there som

[PERFORM] Unexpected pgbench result

2013-12-19 Thread Dave Johansen
I'm working on setting up a large database (or at least what I consider to be a large one with several tables having 10-20 million records inserted per day), and I've been using pgbench to verify that the hardware and database are configured in an optimal manner. When I run pgbench in "SELECT only