pg.ddx.io pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedI have a fusion IO drive available for testing
10+ messages / 8 participants
[nested] [flat]
* I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
@ 2009-03-26 12:47 Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-26 13:49 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Kenny Gorman <KGorman@hi5.com>
2009-03-27 17:23 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
2009-03-27 17:30 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing david@lang.hm
0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Dave Cramer @ 2009-03-26 12:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
So far using dd I am seeing around 264MB/s on ext3, 335MB/s on ext2 write
speed. So the question becomes what is the best filesystem for this drive?
Anyone want me to run anything on it ?
Dave
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
@ 2009-03-26 13:49 ` Kenny Gorman <KGorman@hi5.com>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kenny Gorman @ 2009-03-26 13:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>; pgsql-performance
We have a box outfitted with two of them we are testing. We are testing with VxFS and ext3, but not quite ready to publish. I will reply when we are done.
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org on behalf of Dave Cramer
Sent: Thu 3/26/2009 5:47 AM
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: [PERFORM] I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
So far using dd I am seeing around 264MB/s on ext3, 335MB/s on ext2 write
speed. So the question becomes what is the best filesystem for this drive?
Anyone want me to run anything on it ?
Dave
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
@ 2009-03-27 17:23 ` Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jeff @ 2009-03-27 17:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
On Mar 26, 2009, at 8:47 AM, Dave Cramer wrote:
> So far using dd I am seeing around 264MB/s on ext3, 335MB/s on ext2
> write speed. So the question becomes what is the best filesystem for
> this drive?
>
> Anyone want me to run anything on it ?
>
> Dave
I'd be more interested in the random io numbers.
You can do some tests with pgiosim (avail on pgfoundry) to sort-of
simulate an index scan. It just seeks and reads. It can also randomly
write and or fsync.
I'd be interested in seeing numbers for 1 proc and 10 on the fusionIO.
You have to make some file(s) for it to use first (I usually use dd to
do that, and make sure it is at least 2xRAM in size)
--
Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
http://www.stuarthamm.net/
http://www.dellsmartexitin.com/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
@ 2009-03-27 17:30 ` david@lang.hm
2009-03-27 17:54 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
2009-03-27 20:33 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing David Rees <drees76@gmail.com>
2 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: david@lang.hm @ 2009-03-27 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Dave Cramer wrote:
> So far using dd I am seeing around 264MB/s on ext3, 335MB/s on ext2 write
> speed. So the question becomes what is the best filesystem for this drive?
until the current mess with ext3 and fsync gets resolved, i would say it
would probably be a bad choice. I consider ext4 too new, so I would say
XFS or ext2 (depending on if you need the journal or not)
for the WAL you definantly don't need the journal, for the data I'm not
sure. I believe that postgres does appropriate fsync calls so is safe on a
non-journaling filesystem. the fusionIO devices are small enough that a
fsync on them does not take that long, so it may not be worth the overhead
of the journaling.
David Lang
> Anyone want me to run anything on it ?
>
> Dave
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-27 17:30 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing david@lang.hm
@ 2009-03-27 17:54 ` Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jeff @ 2009-03-27 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: david@lang.hm; +Cc: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>; pgsql-performance
On Mar 27, 2009, at 1:30 PM, david@lang.hm wrote:
>
> for the WAL you definantly don't need the journal, for the data I'm
> not sure. I believe that postgres does appropriate fsync calls so is
> safe on a non-journaling filesystem. the fusionIO devices are small
> enough that a fsync on them does not take that long, so it may not
> be worth the overhead of the journaling.
>
The win for the journal on the heap is simply so you don't need to
spend $longtime fsck'ing if you crash, etc.
--
Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
http://www.stuarthamm.net/
http://www.dellsmartexitin.com/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-27 17:30 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing david@lang.hm
@ 2009-03-27 20:33 ` David Rees <drees76@gmail.com>
2009-03-31 12:20 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: David Rees @ 2009-03-27 20:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: david@lang.hm; +Cc: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>; pgsql-performance
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:30 AM, <david@lang.hm> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Dave Cramer wrote:
>> So far using dd I am seeing around 264MB/s on ext3, 335MB/s on ext2 write
>> speed. So the question becomes what is the best filesystem for this drive?
>
> until the current mess with ext3 and fsync gets resolved, i would say it
> would probably be a bad choice. I consider ext4 too new, so I would say XFS
> or ext2 (depending on if you need the journal or not)
If you're worried about the performance implications of ext3 in
data=ordered mode, the best thing to do is to mount the filesystem in
data=writeback mode instead.
If you're only using the filesystem for PostgreSQL data or logs, your
data will be just as safe except now that data and metadata won't be
forced to disk in the order it was written.
And you still get the benefit of a journal so fsck's after a crash will be fast.
XFS probably is a decent choice, but I don't have much experience with
it except on a desktop system where I can tell you that having write
barriers on absolutely kills performance of anything that does a lot
of filesystem metadata updates. Again, not a big concern if the
filesystem is only being used for PostgreSQL data or logs.
-Dave
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-27 17:30 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing david@lang.hm
2009-03-27 20:33 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing David Rees <drees76@gmail.com>
@ 2009-03-31 12:20 ` Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-31 14:03 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Dave Cramer @ 2009-03-31 12:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Rees <drees76@gmail.com>; +Cc: david@lang.hm; pgsql-performance
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 4:33 PM, David Rees <drees76@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:30 AM, <david@lang.hm> wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Dave Cramer wrote:
> >> So far using dd I am seeing around 264MB/s on ext3, 335MB/s on ext2
> write
> >> speed. So the question becomes what is the best filesystem for this
> drive?
> >
> > until the current mess with ext3 and fsync gets resolved, i would say it
> > would probably be a bad choice. I consider ext4 too new, so I would say
> XFS
> > or ext2 (depending on if you need the journal or not)
>
> If you're worried about the performance implications of ext3 in
> data=ordered mode, the best thing to do is to mount the filesystem in
> data=writeback mode instead.
>
> If you're only using the filesystem for PostgreSQL data or logs, your
> data will be just as safe except now that data and metadata won't be
> forced to disk in the order it was written.
>
> And you still get the benefit of a journal so fsck's after a crash will be
> fast.
>
> XFS probably is a decent choice, but I don't have much experience with
> it except on a desktop system where I can tell you that having write
> barriers on absolutely kills performance of anything that does a lot
> of filesystem metadata updates. Again, not a big concern if the
> filesystem is only being used for PostgreSQL data or logs.
>
> -Dave
>
So I tried writing directly to the device, gets around 250MB/s, reads at
around 500MB/s
The client is using redhat so xfs is not an option.
Dave
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-27 17:30 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing david@lang.hm
2009-03-27 20:33 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing David Rees <drees76@gmail.com>
2009-03-31 12:20 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
@ 2009-03-31 14:03 ` Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
2009-03-31 15:13 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Craig James @ 2009-03-31 14:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
Dave Cramer wrote:
> So I tried writing directly to the device, gets around 250MB/s, reads at
> around 500MB/s
>
> The client is using redhat so xfs is not an option.
I'm using Red Hat and XFS, and have been for years. Why is XFS not an option with Red Hat?
Craig
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-27 17:30 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing david@lang.hm
2009-03-27 20:33 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing David Rees <drees76@gmail.com>
2009-03-31 12:20 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-31 14:03 ` Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
@ 2009-03-31 15:13 ` Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Chris Browne @ 2009-03-31 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
craig_james@emolecules.com (Craig James) writes:
> Dave Cramer wrote:
>> So I tried writing directly to the device, gets around 250MB/s,
>> reads at around 500MB/s
>>
>> The client is using redhat so xfs is not an option.
>
> I'm using Red Hat and XFS, and have been for years. Why is XFS not an option with Red Hat?
If you report practically any kind of problem, and you're using XFS,
or JFS, or such, their "support offering" is to tell you to use a
supported filesystem.
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="cbbrowne.com" in name ^ "@" ^ tld;;
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/linuxxian.html
"The only thing better than TV with the sound off is Radio with the
sound off." -- Dave Moon
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
@ 2009-03-26 13:20 Luke Lonergan <LLonergan@greenplum.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Luke Lonergan @ 2009-03-26 13:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pg@fastcrypt.com <pg@fastcrypt.com>; pgsql-performance
XFS
- Luke
________________________________
From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Sent: Thu Mar 26 05:47:55 2009
Subject: [PERFORM] I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
So far using dd I am seeing around 264MB/s on ext3, 335MB/s on ext2 write speed. So the question becomes what is the best filesystem for this drive?
Anyone want me to run anything on it ?
Dave
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-03-31 15:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-03-26 12:47 I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-26 13:49 ` Kenny Gorman <KGorman@hi5.com>
2009-03-27 17:23 ` Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
2009-03-27 17:30 ` david@lang.hm
2009-03-27 17:54 ` Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
2009-03-27 20:33 ` David Rees <drees76@gmail.com>
2009-03-31 12:20 ` Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
2009-03-31 14:03 ` Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
2009-03-31 15:13 ` Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
2009-03-26 13:20 Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing Luke Lonergan <LLonergan@greenplum.com>
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