public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Riku Iki <[email protected]>
To: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Preallocation changes in Postgresql 16
Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 20:11:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMazQQer1aLg3+KE_nGWttXC177Lh6Aq3OBD4eUGHd5GXUg9LQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMazQQewmq3Zt+mF1JOTTpJyNyhKQT7C_G7z+MjGxs-xRq0Mxw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMazQQfp+3f8tD_Q23rCR=O+Jj4jouSRVigbD8OmrTOfHV+8gA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+hUKGLu-oDokjt=Hyb8cLPTm19s5HZSq0PY-jXBP6-u2cqMEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMazQQewmq3Zt+mF1JOTTpJyNyhKQT7C_G7z+MjGxs-xRq0Mxw@mail.gmail.com>

I did the testing and confirmed that this was the issue.

I run following query:

 create table t as select '1234567890' from generate_series(1, 1000000000);

I commented if (numblocks > 8) codeblock, and see the following results
from "compsize /dbdir/" command.


Before my changes:

Processed 1381 files, 90007 regular extents (90010 refs), 15 inline.
Type       Perc     Disk Usage   Uncompressed Referenced
TOTAL       97%       41G          42G          42G
none       100%       41G          41G          41G
zstd        14%      157M         1.0G         1.0G
prealloc   100%       16M          16M          16M



After the changes:

Processed 1381 files, 347328 regular extents (347331 refs), 15 inline.
Type       Perc     Disk Usage   Uncompressed Referenced
TOTAL        3%      1.4G          42G          42G
none       100%       80K          80K          80K
zstd         3%      1.4G          42G          42G

It is clearly visible that files created with fallocate are not compressed,
and disk usage is much larger.
I am wondering if there is a way to have some feature request to have this
parameter user configurable..

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 4:15 PM Riku Iki <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thank you, I have such a system. I think my task would be to compile PG
> from sources(need to learn this), and see how it works with and without
> that code block.
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 2:25 PM Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 4:37 AM Riku Iki <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > I am wondering if there were preallocation related changes in PG16, and
>> if it is possible to disable preallocation in PostgreSQL 16?
>>
>> I have no opinion on the btrfs details, but I was wondering if someone
>> might show up with a system that doesn't like that change.  Here is a
>> magic 8, tuned on "some filesystems":
>>
>>         /*
>>          * If available and useful, use posix_fallocate() (via
>>          * FileFallocate()) to extend the relation. That's often more
>>          * efficient than using write(), as it commonly won't cause the
>> kernel
>>          * to allocate page cache space for the extended pages.
>>          *
>>          * However, we don't use FileFallocate() for small extensions, as
>> it
>>          * defeats delayed allocation on some filesystems. Not clear where
>>          * that decision should be made though? For now just use a cutoff
>> of
>>          * 8, anything between 4 and 8 worked OK in some local testing.
>>          */
>>         if (numblocks > 8)
>>
>> I wonder if it wants to be a GUC.
>>
>


view thread (4+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Preallocation changes in Postgresql 16
  In-Reply-To: <CAMazQQer1aLg3+KE_nGWttXC177Lh6Aq3OBD4eUGHd5GXUg9LQ@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox