Re: How is random_page_cost=4 ok?
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: How is random_page_cost=4 ok? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSO.4.64.0810101347200.204@westnet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: How is random_page_cost=4 ok? (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: How is random_page_cost=4 ok?
Re: How is random_page_cost=4 ok? Re: How is random_page_cost=4 ok? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008, Gregory Stark wrote: > They don't quote sustained bandwidth for consumer drives but 50-60MB/s are the > numbers I remembered -- admittedly from more than a couple years ago. I didn't > realize 7200 RPM drives had reached such speeds yet. The cheap ($42!) 7200RPM SATA disks I bought a stack of for my home server hit a sequential 110MB/s at the beginning edge, at the other end throughput is still 60-70MB/s. The smaller capacities of Seagate's 7200.11 average about 100MB/s nowadays. But by the time you seek to a location (8-9ms) and line the heads up (half a rotation at 7200RPM averages 4ms) you can easily end up at 12-13ms or higher measured access time on random reads with those. So the true random/sequential ratio reaches crazy numbers. I don't think random_page_cost actually corresponds with any real number anymore. I just treat it as an uncalibrated knob you can turn and benchmark the results at. -- * Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: