Re: postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4

From: Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: "Mkrtchyan, Tigran" <tigran(dot)mkrtchyan(at)desy(dot)de>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
Date: 2014-09-19 23:58:48
Message-ID: 541CC338.5090700@catalyst.net.nz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 19/09/14 19:24, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mark Kirkwood" <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>
>> To: "Tigran Mkrtchyan" <tigran(dot)mkrtchyan(at)desy(dot)de>
>> Cc: "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "postgres performance list" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
>> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 8:26:27 AM
>> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] postgres 9.3 vs. 9.4
>>
>> On 19/09/14 17:53, Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Mark Kirkwood" <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>
>>
>>>> Further to the confusion, here's my 9.3 vs 9.4 on two M550 (one for 9.3
>>>> one for 9.4), see below for results.
>>>>
>>>> I'm running xfs on them with trim/discard enabled:
>>>>
>>>> $ mount|grep pg
>>>> /dev/sdd4 on /mnt/pg94 type xfs (rw,discard)
>>>> /dev/sdc4 on /mnt/pg93 type xfs (rw,discard)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm *not* seeing any significant difference between 9.3 and 9.4, and the
>>>> numbers are both about 2x your best number, which is food for thought
>>>> (those P320's should toast my M550 for write performance...).
>>>
>>> cool! any details on OS and other options? I still get the same numbers
>>> as before.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, Ubuntu 14.04 on a single socket i7 3.4 Ghz, 16G (i.e my workstation).
>>
>> I saw the suggestion that Didier made to run 9.3 on the SSD that you
>> were using for 9.4, and see if it suddenly goes slow - then we'd know
>> it's something about the disk (or filesystem/mount options). Can you
>> test this?
>
>
> swapping the disks did not change the results.
>
>

Do you mean that 9.3 was still faster using the disk that 9.4 had used?
If so that strongly suggests that there is something you have configured
differently in the 9.4 installation [1]. Not wanting to sound mean - but
it is really easy to accidentally connect to the wrong instance when
there are two on the same box (ahem, yes , done it myself). So perhaps
another look at the 9.4 vs 9.3 setup (or even posti the config files
postgresql.conf + postgresql.auto.conf for 9.4 here).

Regards

Mark

[1] In the light of my previous test of (essentially) your config +
numerous other folk have been benchmarking 9.4.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2014-09-20 06:38:03 Re: Yet another abort-early plan disaster on 9.3
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2014-09-19 21:40:49 Re: query a table with lots of coulmns