Re: Testing Sandforce SSD
От | Yeb Havinga |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4C57FB5D.1020006@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Testing Sandforce SSD (Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Testing Sandforce SSD
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Hannu Krosing wrote: > Did it fit in shared_buffers, or system cache ? > Database was ~5GB, server has 16GB, shared buffers was set to 1920MB. > I first noticed this several years ago, when doing a COPY to a large > table with indexes took noticably longer (2-3 times longer) when the > indexes were in system cache than when they were in shared_buffers. > I read this as a hint: try increasing shared_buffers. I'll redo the pgbench run with increased shared_buffers. >> so the test is actually how fast the ssd can capture >> sequential WAL writes and fsync without barriers, mixed with an >> occasional checkpoint with random write IO on another partition). Since >> the WAL writing is the same for both block_size setups, I decided to >> compare random writes to a file of 5GB with Oracle's Orion tool: >> > > Are you sure that you are not writing full WAL pages ? > I'm not sure I understand this question. > Do you have any stats on how much WAL is written for 8kb and 4kb test > cases ? > Would some iostat -xk 1 for each partition suffice? > And for other disk i/o during the tests ? > Not existent. regards, Yeb Havinga
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: