Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Evgeny Shishkin
Subject Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance
Date
Msg-id A62086F6-67AE-441F-85A5-9C26EF59EBC4@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance  (Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
On Oct 9, 2012, at 2:44 AM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Craig James <cjames@emolecules.com> wrote:
>>>> But why? What have I overlooked?
>>>
>>> Do you have readahead properly set up on the new one?
>>
>>
>> # blockdev --getra /dev/sdb1
>> 256
>
>
> It's probably this. 256 is way too low to saturate your I/O system.
> Pump it up. I've found 8192 works nice for a system I have, 32000 I
> guess could work too.

This, i also suggest to rebenchmark with increased wal_buffers. May be that downscale comes from wal mutex contention.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Claudio Freire
Date:
Subject: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance
Next
From: Craig James
Date:
Subject: Re: Two identical systems, radically different performance