This is a discussion on Postgresql Performance on an HP DL385 and SmartArray 642 within the Pgsql Performance forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> I am do some consulting for an animal hospital in the Boston, MA area. They wanted a new server ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| I am do some consulting for an animal hospital in the Boston, MA area. They wanted a new server to run their database on. The client wants everything from one vendor, they wanted Dell initially, I'd advised against it. I recommended a dual Opteron system from either Sun or HP. They settled on a DL385 8GB of RAM with two disc U320 SCSI and a 6-disc U320 SCSI array. I recommended they add a RAID adapter with at 128MB and battery backup, they added a HP SmartArray 642 to connect to the drive array in addition to the SmartArray 6i which came with the server. Has anyone worked with server before. I've read the SmartArray 6i is a poor performer, I wonder if the SmartArray 642 adapter would have the same fate? The database data is on the drive array(RAID10) and the pg_xlog is on the internal RAID1 on the 6i controller. The results have been poor. My guess is the controllers are garbage. Thanks for any advice. Steve Poe ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq |
| |||
| Steve, On 8/5/06 4:10 PM, "Steve Poe" <steve.poe@gmail.com> wrote: > I am do some consulting for an animal hospital in the Boston, MA area. > They wanted a new server to run their database on. The client wants > everything from one vendor, they wanted Dell initially, I'd advised > against it. I recommended a dual Opteron system from either Sun or HP. > They settled on a DL385 8GB of RAM with two disc U320 SCSI and a 6-disc > U320 SCSI array. I recommended they add a RAID adapter with at 128MB and > battery backup, they added a HP SmartArray 642 to connect to the drive > array in addition to the SmartArray 6i which came with the server. > > Has anyone worked with server before. I've read the SmartArray 6i is a > poor performer, I wonder if the SmartArray 642 adapter would have the > same fate? > > The database data is on the drive array(RAID10) and the pg_xlog is on > the internal RAID1 on the 6i controller. The results have been poor. > > My guess is the controllers are garbage. Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results here? It could be OK if you have the latest Linux driver for cciss, someone has reported good results to this list with the latest, bleeding edge version of Linux (2.6.17). - Luke ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match |
| |||
| Luke, I'll do that then post the results. I ran zcav on it (default settlings) on the disc array formatted XFS and its peak MB/s was around 85-90. I am using kernel 2.6.17.7. mounting the disc array with noatime, nodiratime. Thanks for your feedback. Steve On 8/7/06, Luke Lonergan <llonergan@greenplum.com> wrote: > > Steve, > > On 8/5/06 4:10 PM, "Steve Poe" <steve.poe@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am do some consulting for an animal hospital in the Boston, MA area. > > They wanted a new server to run their database on. The client wants > > everything from one vendor, they wanted Dell initially, I'd advised > > against it. I recommended a dual Opteron system from either Sun or HP. > > They settled on a DL385 8GB of RAM with two disc U320 SCSI and a 6-disc > > U320 SCSI array. I recommended they add a RAID adapter with at 128MB and > > battery backup, they added a HP SmartArray 642 to connect to the drive > > array in addition to the SmartArray 6i which came with the server. > > > > Has anyone worked with server before. I've read the SmartArray 6i is a > > poor performer, I wonder if the SmartArray 642 adapter would have the > > same fate? > > > > The database data is on the drive array(RAID10) and the pg_xlog is on > > the internal RAID1 on the 6i controller. The results have been poor. > > > > My guess is the controllers are garbage. > > Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results > here? > > It could be OK if you have the latest Linux driver for cciss, someone has > reported good results to this list with the latest, bleeding edge version > of > Linux (2.6.17). > > - Luke > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match > |
| |||
| >> The database data is on the drive array(RAID10) and the pg_xlog is on >> the internal RAID1 on the 6i controller. The results have been poor. I have heard that the 6i was actually decent but to avoid the 5i. Joshua D. Drake >> >> My guess is the controllers are garbage. > > Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results > here? > > It could be OK if you have the latest Linux driver for cciss, someone has > reported good results to this list with the latest, bleeding edge version of > Linux (2.6.17). > > - Luke > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match |
| |||
| There is 64MB on the 6i and 192MB on the 642 controller. I wish the controllers had a "wrieback" enable option like the LSI MegaRAID adapters have. I have tried splitting the cache accelerator 25/75 75/25 0/100 100/0 but the results really did not improve. Steve On 8/7/06, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > > >> The database data is on the drive array(RAID10) and the pg_xlog is on > >> the internal RAID1 on the 6i controller. The results have been poor. > > I have heard that the 6i was actually decent but to avoid the 5i. > > Joshua D. Drake > > > >> > >> My guess is the controllers are garbage. > > > > Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results > > here? > > > > It could be OK if you have the latest Linux driver for cciss, someone > has > > reported good results to this list with the latest, bleeding edge > version of > > Linux (2.6.17). > > > > - Luke > > > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > > match > > > > > -- > > === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === > Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 > Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 > http://www.commandprompt.com/ > > > |
| |||
| Luke, Here are the results of two runs of 16GB file tests on XFS. scsi disc array xfs ,16G,81024,99,153016,24,73422,10,82092,97,243210,1 7,1043.1,0,16,3172,7,+++++,+++,2957,9,3197,10,++++ +,+++,2484,8 scsi disc array xfs ,16G,83320,99,155641,25,73662,10,81756,96,243352,1 8,1029.1,0,16,3119,10,+++++,+++,2789,7,3263,11,+++ ++,+++,2014,6 Thanks. Steve > Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results > here? > > It could be OK if you have the latest Linux driver for cciss, someone has > reported good results to this list with the latest, bleeding edge version of > Linux (2.6.17). > > - Luke > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq |
| |||
| These number are pretty darn good for a four disk RAID 10, pretty close to perfect infact. Nice advert for the 642 - I guess we have a Hardware RAID controller than will read indpendently from mirrors. Alex On 8/8/06, Steve Poe <steve.poe@gmail.com> wrote: > > Luke, > > Here are the results of two runs of 16GB file tests on XFS. > > scsi disc array > xfs ,16G,81024,99,153016,24,73422,10,82092,97,243210,1 7,1043.1 > ,0,16,3172,7,+++++,+++,2957,9,3197,10,+++++,+++,24 84,8 > scsi disc array > xfs ,16G,83320,99,155641,25,73662,10,81756,96,243352,1 8,1029.1 > ,0,16,3119,10,+++++,+++,2789,7,3263,11,+++++,+++,2 014,6 > > Thanks. > > Steve > > > > > Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results > > here? > > > > It could be OK if you have the latest Linux driver for cciss, someone > has > > reported good results to this list with the latest, bleeding edge > version of > > Linux (2.6.17). > > > > - Luke > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > > match > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > |
| |||
| On Aug 5, 2006, at 7:10 PM, Steve Poe wrote: > > Has anyone worked with server before. I've read the SmartArray 6i is a > poor performer, I wonder if the SmartArray 642 adapter would have the > same fate? > My newest db is a DL385, 6 disks. It runs very nicely. I have no issues with the 6i controller. If you look in the pgsql-performance archives a week or two ago you'll see a similar thread to this one - in fact, it is also about a dl385 (but he had a 5i controller) -- Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com> http://www.dellsmartexitin.com/ http://www.stuarthamm.net/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings |
| |||
| Alex, Maybe I mis-stated, this is a 6-disk array. Steve On 8/7/06, Alex Turner <armtuk@gmail.com> wrote: > > These number are pretty darn good for a four disk RAID 10, pretty close to > perfect infact. Nice advert for the 642 - I guess we have a Hardware RAID > controller than will read indpendently from mirrors. > > Alex > > On 8/8/06, Steve Poe <steve.poe@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Luke, > > Here are the results of two runs of 16GB file tests on XFS. > > scsi disc array > xfs ,16G,81024,99,153016,24,73422,10,82092,97,243210,1 7,1043.1 > ,0,16,3172,7,+++++,+++,2957,9,3197,10,+++++,+++,24 84,8 > scsi disc array > xfs ,16G,83320,99,155641,25,73662,10,81756,96,243352,1 8,1029.1 > ,0,16,3119,10,+++++,+++,2789,7,3263,11,+++++,+++,2 014,6 > > Thanks. > > Steve > > > > > Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results > > > here? > > > > It could be OK if you have the latest Linux driver for cciss, someone > has > > reported good results to this list with the latest, bleeding edge > version of > > Linux (2.6.17). > > > > - Luke > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > > match > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > > |
| ||||
| Hi, > Can you run bonnie++ version 1.03a on the machine and report the results > here? Do you know if the figures from bonnie++ are able to measure the performance related to the overhead of the 'fsync' option? I had very strange performance differences between two Dell 1850 machines months ago, and raw performance (hdparm, not bonnie++) was similar, the only figure I could find with a significant difference able to explain the issue was the "await" compound reported by "iostat" - but I was still very much in the dark :/ http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql...3/msg00407.php -- Guillaume Cottenceau Create your personal SMS or WAP Service - visit http://mobilefriends.ch/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|