|
From: Nirmal S. <sha...@gm...> - 2014-02-25 17:50:36
|
Hi All,
Thanks for your reply.
So now i have 2 questions:
1. I have this machine (Mem: 32 GB and Cores:16) and have these 2 option
-> (a) Install postgress on the same and start using it. (b) Create a 3
node PG-XC cluster on the same machine and start using it.
So can you tell me which option is better ? Does it make sense to create a
cluster on the same machine or is it always better to use separate physical
machines for each node to create an PG-XC cluster?
2. What is the better configuration for PG-XC cluster among these ->
(a) For 3 Node cluster, having 1 coordinator and 3 data node is better
than having 1 separate coordinator for each data node (i.e 3 Cord, 3 data
node)?
Please reply.
Regards.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <
ash...@en...> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:47 AM, Nirmal Sharma <sha...@gm...>wrote:
>
>> *This is my postgres box config:*
>> Mem : 32GB Cores : 16 model name :
>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5630 @ 2.53GHz stepping : 2 cpu
>> MHz : 2527.184 cache size : 12288 KB
>> *This is my pg-xc (1 cordinator and 3 data node cluster) config:*
>>
>> (All the 4 physical boxes are same with below mentioned config)
>> Mem : 24GB Cores: 8 Model name: stepping
>> : 5 cpu MHz : 1994.961 cache size : 4096 KB
>>
>>
> For an apple to apple comparison, it's better to have Postgres and each of
> the coordinator/datanode of XC deployed on same kind of configuration. From
> the description, it looks like single Postgres is getting better hardware.
> So, it's not surprising to see XC not getting at-par performance when
> compared to PG.
>
>>
>>
>> In Pg-xc, only my dimension tables are replicated and facts are hash
>> key distributed. Data and other things are same in pg and pg-xc.
>> My pg-xc is giving me only marginal better performance than pg and thats
>> the reason i am wondering whether to use pg-xc or not?
>>
>>
> This distribution looks good. Make sure that you are using the right keys
> for distributed tables. Please check my presentation at
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1OPKvyj87Q. That might give some more
> hints as to how to choose right distribution strategy.
>
>
>> Regards
>> ~Nirmal
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Mason Sharp <ms...@tr...>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Nirmal Sharma <sha...@gm...>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I am using both postgress and postgress-XC and both are working fine
>>>> but in terms of performance, they both are same(with same amount of data in
>>>> both).
>>>> I was hoping for better performance in pg-xc but it is just marginally
>>>> better than PG and not much. So why then to use pg-xc?
>>>>
>>>> Can somebody tell me in what cases do we use pg-xc rather than PG?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It all depends on your workload and configuration. How many nodes and
>>> physical servers are you using, and what is your workload and schema like?
>>> Hopefully you are not replicating every table.
>>>
>>> There are cases like TPC-C where you will experience a noticeable
>>> improvement. There are other cases like TPC-H where performance will be
>>> worse than plain PostgreSQL.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mason Sharp
>>>
>>> TransLattice - http://www.translattice.com
>>> Distributed and Clustered Database Solutions
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Flow-based real-time traffic analytics software. Cisco certified tool.
>> Monitor traffic, SLAs, QoS, Medianet, WAAS etc. with NetFlow Analyzer
>> Customize your own dashboards, set traffic alerts and generate reports.
>> Network behavioral analysis & security monitoring. All-in-one tool.
>>
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=126839071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>> _______________________________________________
>> Postgres-xc-general mailing list
>> Pos...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postgres-xc-general
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EnterpriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
>
|