From: Karl Denninger <karl@denninger.net>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Revisiting disk layout on ZFS systems
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 07:12:37 -0500
Message-ID: <535F9735.1070503@denninger.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B17CF49B1@ntex2010i.host.magwien.gv.at>
References: <535E781A.5030708@denninger.net>
<A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B17CF49B1@ntex2010i.host.magwien.gv.at>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
On 4/29/2014 3:13 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Karl Denninger wrote:
>> I've been doing a bit of benchmarking and real-world performance
>> testing, and have found some curious results.
> [...]
>
>> The odd thing is that I am getting better performance with a 128k record
>> size on this application than I get with an 8k one!
> [...]
>
>> What I am curious about, however, is the xlog -- that appears to suffer
>> pretty badly from 128k record size, although it compresses even
>> more-materially; 1.94x (!)
>>
>> The files in the xlog directory are large (16MB each) and thus "first
>> blush" would be that having a larger record size for that storage area
>> would help. It appears that instead it hurts.
> As has been explained, the access patterns for WAL are quite different.
>
> For your experiment, I'd keep them on different file systems so that
> you can tune them independently.
>
They're on physically-different packs (pools and groups of spindles) as
that has been best practice for performance reasons pretty-much always
-- I just thought it was interesting, and worth noting, that the usual
recommendation to run an 8k record size for the data store itself may no
longer be valid.
It certainly isn't with my workload.
--
-- Karl
karl@denninger.net
Attachments:
smime.p7s (application/pkcs7-signature, 2.6K) download
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: karl@denninger.net
Subject: Re: Revisiting disk layout on ZFS systems
In-Reply-To: <535F9735.1070503@denninger.net>
* 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