From: Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc>
To: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Luke Lonergan <llonergan@greenplum.com>
Cc: Carlo Stonebanks <stonec.register@sympatico.ca>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: random_page_costs - are defaults of 4.0 realistic for SCSI RAID 1
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:08:26 -0400
Message-ID: <46E5C05A.7010800@mark.mielke.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y7fekxga.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
References: <C30AF4C7.4230B%llonergan@greenplum.com>
<87y7fekxga.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan@greenplum.com> writes:
>
>> Increasing the number of disks in a RAID actually makes the number higher,
>> not lower. Until Postgres gets AIO + the ability to post multiple
>> concurrent IOs on index probes, random IO does not scale with increasing
>> disk count, but sequential does, thus the increasing "random page cost" as
>> the RAID gets faster.
>>
> What I don't understand is the bit about "until Postgres gets AIO + the
> ability to post multiple concurrent IOs on index probes". Even with AIO your
> seek times are not going to be improved by wide raid stripes. And you can't
> possibly find the page at level n+1 before you've looked at the page at level
> n. Do you mean to be able to probe multiple index keys simultaneously? How
> does that work out
One suggestion: The plan is already in a tree. With some dependency
analysis, I assume the tree could be executed in parallel (multiple
threads or event triggered entry into a state machine), and I/O to fetch
index pages or table pages could be scheduled in parallel. At this
point, AIO becomes necessary to let the underlying system (and hardware
with tagged queueing?) schedule which pages should be served best first.
Cheers,
mark
--
Mark Mielke <mark@mielke.cc>
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: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: mark@mark.mielke.cc, stark@enterprisedb.com, llonergan@greenplum.com, stonec.register@sympatico.ca
Subject: Re: random_page_costs - are defaults of 4.0 realistic for SCSI RAID 1
In-Reply-To: <46E5C05A.7010800@mark.mielke.cc>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox