Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD...
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 29461.1062110628@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... (Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD...
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> writes: > Early performance tests on my laptop suggest it's about 8% faster for > writing when both the FS and PostgreSQL use 16K blocks. BTW, I don't really believe that one set of tests, conducted on one single machine, are anywhere near enough justification for changing this value. Especially not if it's a laptop rather than a typical server configuration. You've got considerably less I/O bandwidth in proportion to CPU horsepower than a server. Why is that an issue? Well, a larger block size will substantially increase our WAL overhead (because we tend to dump whole blocks into WAL at the slightest provocation) and on slower machines the CRC64 calculations involved in WAL entries are a significant cost. On a machine with less CPU and more disk horsepower than you tested, the tradeoffs could be a lot different. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: