Re: performance on new linux box - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Eliot Gable
Subject Re: performance on new linux box
Date
Msg-id AANLkTiloWDARpJw6xEZwuvSt_iVySIplr0Wg4zThXMPK@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: performance on new linux box  (Andy Colson <andy@squeakycode.net>)
Responses Re: performance on new linux box  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-performance

On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Andy Colson <andy@squeakycode.net> wrote:
On 07/07/2010 06:06 PM, Ryan Wexler wrote:
Postgresql was previously running on a single cpu linux machine with 2 gigs of memory and a single sata drive (v8.3).  Basically a desktop with linux on it.  I experienced slow performance.

So, I finally moved it to a real server.  A dually zeon centos machine with 6 gigs of memory and raid 10, postgres 8.4.  But, I am now experiencing even worse performance issues.

My system is consistently highly transactional.  However, there is also regular complex queries and occasional bulk loads.

On the new system the bulk loads are extremely slower than on the previous machine and so are the more complex queries.  The smaller transactional queries seem comparable but i had expected an improvement.  Performing a db import via psql -d databas -f dbfile illustrates this problem.  It takes 5 hours to run this import.  By contrast, if I perform this same exact import on my crappy windows box with only 2 gigs of memory and default postgres settings it takes 1 hour.  Same deal with the old linux machine.  How is this possible?

Here are some of my key config settings:
max_connections = 100
shared_buffers = 768MB
effective_cache_size = 2560MB
work_mem = 16MB
maintenance_work_mem = 128MB
checkpoint_segments = 7
checkpoint_timeout = 7min
checkpoint_completion_target = 0.5

I have tried varying the shared_buffers size from 128 all the way to 1500mbs and got basically the same result.   Is there a setting change I should be considering?

Does 8.4 have performance problems or is this unique to me?

thanks


Yeah, I inherited a "server" (the quotes are sarcastic air quotes), with really bad disk IO... er.. really safe disk IO.  Try the dd test.  On my desktop I get 60-70 meg a second.  On this "server" (I laugh) I got about 20.  I had to go out of my way (way out) to enable the disk caching, and even then only got 50 meg a second.

http://www.westnet.com/~gsmith/content/postgresql/pg-disktesting.htm


For about $2k - $3k, you can get a server that will do upwards of 300 MB/sec, assuming the bulk of that cost goes to a good hardware-based RAID controller with a battery backed-up cache and some good 15k RPM SAS drives. Since it sounds like you are disk I/O bound, it's probably not worth it for you to spend extra on CPU and memory. Sink the money into the disk array instead. If you have an extra $4k more money in your budget, you might even try 4 of these in a RAID 10:

http://www.provantage.com/ocz-technology-oczssd2-2vtxex100g~7OCZT0L9.htm



--
Eliot Gable

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Pierre C"
Date:
Subject: Re: performance on new linux box
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: performance on new linux box