Commit slower on faster PC - Mailing list pgsql-performance

Hi,

please help me with the following problem:

I have noticed a strange performance behaviour using a commit statement on two different machines. On one of the
machinesthe commit is many times faster than on the other machine which has faster hardware. Server and client are
runningalways on the same machine. 

Server version (same on both machines): PostgreSQL 8.1.3. (same binaries as well)

PC1:
----
Pentium 4 (2.8 GHz)
1GB RAM
IDE-HDD (approx. 50 MB/s rw), fs: ext3
Mandrake Linux: Kernel 2.4.22


PC2:
----
Pentium 4 (3.0 GHz)
2GB RAM
SCSI-HDD (approx. 65 MB/s rw), fs: ext3
Mandrake Linux: Kernel 2.4.32


Both installations of the database have the same configuration, different from default are only the following settings
onboth machines: 

shared_buffers = 20000
listen_addresses = '*'
max_stack_depth = 4096


pgbench gives me the following results:
PC1:
----
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 1
number of clients: 1
number of transactions per client: 10
number of transactions actually processed: 10/10
tps = 269.905533 (including connections establishing)
tps = 293.625393 (excluding connections establishing)

PC2:
----
transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
scaling factor: 1
number of clients: 1
number of transactions per client: 10
number of transactions actually processed: 10/10
tps = 46.061935 (including connections establishing)
tps = 46.519634 (excluding connections establishing)


My own performance test sql script which inserts and (auto)commits some data into a simple table produces the following
logoutput in the server log: 

PC1:
----
LOG:  duration: 1.441 ms  statement: INSERT INTO performance_test VALUES (500938362, 'Xawhefjmd');
STATEMENT:  INSERT INTO performance_test VALUES (500938362, 'Xawhefjmd');

PC2:
----
LOG:  duration: 29.979 ms  statement: INSERT INTO performance_test VALUES (500938362, 'Xawhefjmd');
STATEMENT:  INSERT INTO performance_test VALUES (500938362, 'Xawhefjmd');


I created a 'strace' one both machines which is interesting:

Opening the socket:
-------------------
PC1: socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_IP) = 10 <0.000021>
PC2: socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_IP) = 8 <0.000015>

PC1: bind(10, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(0), sin_addr=inet_addr("0.0.0.0")}, 16) = 0 <0.000007>
PC2: bind (8, {sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(0), sin_addr=inet_addr("0.0.0.0")}}, 16) = 0 <0.000007>

PC1: getsockname(10, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(32820), sin_addr=inet_addr("0.0.0.0")}, [16]) = 0 <0.000005>
PC2: getsockname( 8, {sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(36219), sin_addr=inet_addr("0.0.0.0")}}, [16]) = 0 <0.000005>

PC1: connect(10, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(5432), sin_addr=inet_addr("127.0.0.1")}, 16) = 0 <0.000440>
PC2: connect( 8, {sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(5432), sin_addr=inet_addr("127.0.0.1")}}, 16) = 0 <0.000394>

PC1: setsockopt(10, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, [1], 4) = 0 <0.000006>
PC2: setsockopt (8, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, [1], 4) = 0 <0.000004>


Inserting and commiting the data: <exec. time>
---------------------------------
PC1:
----
send(10, "B\....\0<\0INSERT INTO performance_test VAL"..., 175, 0) = 175 <0.000015>
recv(10, "2\....0\17INSERT 0 1\0Z\0\0\0\5T", 8192, 0) = 53 <0.000007>
send(10, "B\0\0\0\17\0S_2\0\0\0\0\0\0\0E\0\0\0\t\0\0\0\0\1S\0\0\0\4", 31, 0) = 31 <0.000011>
recv(10, "2\0\0\0\4C\0\0\0\vCOMMIT\0Z\0\0\0\5I", 8192, 0) = 23 <0.000211>

PC2:
----
send(8, "B\....\0<\0INSERT INTO performance_test VAL"..., 175, 0) = 175 <0.000014>
recv(8, "2\....0\17INSERT 0 1\0Z\0\0\0\5T", 8192, 0) = 53 <0.000005>
send(8, "B\0\0\0\17\0S_2\0\0\0\0\0\0\0E\0\0\0\t\0\0\0\0\1S\0\0\0\4", 31, 0) = 31 <0.000009>
recv(8, "2\0\0\0\4C\0\0\0\vCOMMIT\0Z\0\0\0\5I", 8192, 0) = 23 <0.0253>

Every command is a bit faster on PC2 except the last one which is many times slower.
Any help or hint where to look at would be highly appreciated because I'm running out of ideas ;-).


regards,
Christian


******************************************
The information contained in, or attached to, this e-mail, may contain confidential information and is intended solely
forthe use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may be subject to legal privilege.  If you have
receivedthis e-mail in error you should notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail, delete the message from your
systemand notify your system manager.  Please do not copy it for any purpose, or disclose its contents to any other
person. The views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent
thoseof the company.  The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses.  The
companyaccepts no liability for any damage caused, directly or indirectly, by any virus transmitted in this email. 
******************************************