pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
checkpoint_completion_target and Ext3
2+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]

* checkpoint_completion_target and Ext3
@ 2011-02-04 21:22 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
  2011-02-06 08:09 ` Re: checkpoint_completion_target and Ext3 Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread

From: Josh Berkus @ 2011-02-04 21:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: pgsql-performance

Greg (Smith),

Given your analysis of fsync'ing behavior on Ext3, would you say that it
is better to set checkpoint_completion_target to 0.0 on Ext3?

-- 
                                  -- Josh Berkus
                                     PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
                                     http://www.pgexperts.com



^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: checkpoint_completion_target and Ext3
  2011-02-04 21:22 checkpoint_completion_target and Ext3 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
@ 2011-02-06 08:09 ` Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread

From: Greg Smith @ 2011-02-06 08:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>; +Cc: pgsql-performance

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Given your analysis of fsync'ing behavior on Ext3, would you say that it
> is better to set checkpoint_completion_target to 0.0 on Ext3?
>   

Setting that to 0.0 gives the same basic behavior as in 8.2 and earlier 
versions.  Those had even worst I/O spikes issues.  Even on ext3, there 
is value to spreading the writes around over time, particularly if you 
have a large setting for checkpoint_segments.  Ideally the write phase 
will be spread out over 2.5 minutes, if you've set the segments high 
enough that checkpoints are being driven by checkpoint_timeout.  The 
original testing myself and Heikki did settled on the default of 0.5 for 
checkpoint_completion_target on ext3, so that part hasn't really 
changed.  It's still better than just writing everything in one big 
dump, as you'd see with it set to 0.0.

While Linux and ext3 aren't great about getting stuff to disk, doing 
some writing in advance of sync will improve things at least a little.  
The thing that I don't ever expect to work on ext3 is spreading the sync 
phase out over time.

P.S. those of you who are into filesystem trivia but don't read 
pgsql-hackers normally may enjoy 
http://blog.2ndquadrant.com/en/2011/01/tuning-linux-for-low-postgresq.html 
and 
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4D4C4610.1030109@2ndquadrant.com 
which has the research Josh is alluding to here.  I also just wrote a 
rebuttal today to the "PostgreSQL doesn't have hints" meme at 
http://blog.2ndquadrant.com/en/2011/02/hinting-at-postgresql.html

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support  www.2ndQuadrant.us
"PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books




^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread


end of thread, other threads:[~2011-02-06 08:09 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-02-04 21:22 checkpoint_completion_target and Ext3 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
2011-02-06 08:09 ` Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.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