MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CALAkhNX_6OttLJa7X+0wA7vx+wVCUMHjNcgg+2fjw=_Z3CXTKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <359C3FF2-C038-4237-A361-4DAEFA92C114@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <359C3FF2-C038-4237-A361-4DAEFA92C114@gmail.com>
From: Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2026 08:02:54 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CANzqJaAKAzYaGfPFLzt4ZZDs6sE5KGWuMmGWQ1oQYeC-wzHk_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: About asynchronous I/O
To: Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b61d9e0654ea8a9e"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANzqJaAKAzYaGfPFLzt4ZZDs6sE5KGWuMmGWQ1oQYeC-wzHk_A%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--000000000000b61d9e0654ea8a9e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 7:26=E2=80=AFAM bertrand HARTWIG <hartwig.bertrand@=
gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> The size of the database is clearly not important.
>
> What matters are queries that are not already cached and that perform I/O=
.
>
> With async I/O, you can see I/O performance improvements of up to
> 200%=E2=80=93300%. The higher the disk latency, the greater the gains you=
 will
> notice.
>

So, not so useful on SSD/NVMe?


> Regards,
>
> Bertrand
>
> Le 23 juin 2026 =C3=A0 09:55, ek ek <livadidrive@gmail.com> a =C3=A9crit =
:
>
> Hello everyone,
> Are any of you running PostgreSQL 18 on production environments sized
> between 1 to 3TB? Does the 'asynchronous I/O (AIO) subsystem' deliver a
> significant performance increase? Also, has anyone had the opportunity to
> benchmark it against v17?
>
>
>

--=20
Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce.
Don't boil me, I'm still alive.
<Redacted> lobster!

--000000000000b61d9e0654ea8a9e
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"background-color:transpare=
nt">On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 7:26=E2=80=AFAM bertrand HARTWIG &lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:hartwig.bertrand@gmail.com">hartwig.bertrand@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrot=
e:</span></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><blockquote=
 class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px so=
lid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><p>Hello,</p><p>The size of the=
 database is clearly not important.</p><p>What matters are queries that are=
 not already cached and that perform I/O.</p><p>With async I/O, you can see=
 I/O performance improvements of up to 200%=E2=80=93300%. The higher the di=
sk latency, the greater the gains you will notice.</p></div></blockquote><d=
iv><br></div><div>So, not so useful on SSD/NVMe?</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left=
:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><p>Regards,</p><p>Bertra=
nd</p><div><div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div>Le 23 juin 2026 =C3=A0 0=
9:55, ek ek &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:livadidrive@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">=
livadidrive@gmail.com</a>&gt; a =C3=A9crit :</div><br><div><div dir=3D"auto=
"><div dir=3D"auto">Hello everyone,</div><div dir=3D"auto">Are any of you r=
unning PostgreSQL 18 on production environments sized between 1 to 3TB? Doe=
s the &#39;asynchronous I/O (AIO) subsystem&#39; deliver a significant perf=
ormance increase? Also, has anyone had the opportunity to benchmark it agai=
nst v17?</div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></blockquote></div><div><br clear=
=3D"all"></div><div><br></div><span class=3D"gmail_signature_prefix">-- </s=
pan><br><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr">Death t=
o &lt;Redacted&gt;, and butter sauce.<div>Don&#39;t boil me, I&#39;m still =
alive.<br><div><div>&lt;Redacted&gt; lobster!</div></div></div></div></div>=
</div>

--000000000000b61d9e0654ea8a9e--