Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FE99FB5E9 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:58:19 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 69344-02 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:58:11 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.189]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE8A79FB2B8 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:58:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i10so183823mue for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 01:58:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:sender; b=b/RY4JwuBPA9B01R8lrAZlUp1iZYNnAK59rrKoGg+AjlrHnj0i2QFW55fQkX+qBTVUyLwbUdzypdGaWo7iClQfjY4rgbHAoWuKchWBZdXpkV1LmgP+6UXEWSwlrpcDmvx1Sc8ZQGVHVYmNO+oLZj6OrctVnQm2X+9Gn263RuGwU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:sender; b=Oi2wb3bCTafVEK4FhJGISh4i+ZrlWteboGEg7UduvgaaiDFAbp8DKpL/2OPIKx7NS7enpaaS0Z9/RUoKsmXz5SYKVvFxafWsXFEuAQpTJ3h7IUxErNyuF91Sq7effiHtQhQNT29D2PxUXAvLSxqbodNqMZ1daN8jH4bageguPvY= Received: by 10.82.106.14 with SMTP id e14mr1633030buc.1184749092883; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 01:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.33? ( [82.20.57.141]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 34sm3025223nfu.2007.07.18.01.58.09 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 18 Jul 2007 01:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <469DD5EB.3010904@enterprisedb.com> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 09:57:15 +0100 From: Heikki Linnakangas User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070329) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thomas Finneid CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: importance of fast disks with pg References: <469D382E.6030603@ifi.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <469D382E.6030603@ifi.uio.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200707/207 X-Sequence-Number: 25891 Thomas Finneid wrote: > During the somes I did I noticed that it does not necessarily seem to be > true that one needs the fastest disks to have a pg system that is fast. > > It seems to me that its more important to: > - choose the correct methods to use for the operation > - tune the pg memory settings > - tune/disable pg xlog/wal etc > > It also seems to me that fast disks are more important for db systems of > the OLTP type applications with real concurrency of both readers and > writes across many, possibly larger, tables etc. > > Are the above statements close to having any truth in them? It depends. The key to performance is to identify the bottleneck. If your CPU is running at 50%, and spends 50% of the time waiting for I/O, a faster disk will help. But only up to a point. After you add enough I/O capability that the CPU is running at 100%, getting faster disks doesn't help anymore. At that point you need to get more CPU power. Here's the algorithm for increasing application throughput: while throughput is not high enough { identify bottleneck resolve bottleneck, by faster/more hardware, or by optimizing application } -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com