Linux I/O tuning: CFQ vs. deadline
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Linux I/O tuning: CFQ vs. deadline |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4B6FDD26.9010106@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Linux I/O tuning: CFQ vs. deadline
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Recently I've made a number of unsubstantiated claims that the deadline scheduler on Linux does bad things compared to CFQ when running real-world mixed I/O database tests. Unfortunately every time I do one of these I end up unable to release the results due to client confidentiality issues. However, I do keep an eye out for people who run into the same issues in public benchmarks, and I just found one: http://insights.oetiker.ch/linux/fsopbench/ The problem analyzed in the "Deadline considered harmful" section looks exactly like what I run into: deadline just does some bad things when the I/O workload gets complicated. And the conclusion reached there, "the deadline scheduler did not have advantages in any of our test cases", has been my conclusion for every round of pgbench-based testing I've done too. In that case, the specific issue is that reads get blocked badly when checkpoint writes are doing heavier work; you can see the read I/O numbers reported by "vmstat 1" go completely to zero for a second or more when it happens. That can happen with CFQ, too, but it consistently seems more likely to occur with deadline. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: