From: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
To: Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Performance increase with elevator=deadline
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 15:47:17 +0100
Message-ID: <878wzkh2iy.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C201FA62C8@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at>
References: <D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C201FA62C8@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at>
"Albe Laurenz" <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at> writes:
> This refers to the performance problem reported in
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2008-04/msg00052.php
>
> After some time of trial and error we found that changing the I/O scheduling
> algorithm to "deadline" improved I/O performance by a factor 4 (!) for
> this specific load test.
What was the algorithm before?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's On-Demand Production Tuning
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: stark@enterprisedb.com, laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at
Subject: Re: Performance increase with elevator=deadline
In-Reply-To: <878wzkh2iy.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
* 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