Re: Best COPY Performance

Merlin/Luke:

> > in theory, with 10 10k disks in raid 10, you should be able to keep
> > your 2fc link saturated all the time unless your i/o is extremely
> > random.  random i/o is the wild card here, ideally you should see at
> > least 2000 seeks in bonnie...lets see what comes up.

> I suspect the problem here is the sequential I/O rate - let's wait and see
> what the dd test results look like.

Here are the tests that you suggested that I do, on both the local
disks (WAL) and the SAN (tablespace).  The random seeks seem to be far
below what Merlin said was "good", so I am a bit concerned.  There is
a bit of other activity on the box at the moment which is hard to
stop, so that might have had an impact on the processing.

Here is the bonnie++ output:

Version 1.03       ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
                   -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
              Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP  /sec %CP
Local Disks    31G 45119  85 56548  21 27527   8 35069  66 86506  13 499.6   1
SAN            31G 53544  98 93385  35 18266   5 24970  47 57911   8 611.8   1

And here are the dd results for 16GB RAM, i.e. 4,000,000 8K blocks:
# Local Disks
$ time bash -c "dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/myhome/bigfile bs=8k
count=4000000 && sync"
4000000+0 records in
4000000+0 records out

real    10m0.382s
user    0m1.117s
sys     2m45.681s
$ time dd if=/home/myhome/bigfile of=/dev/null bs=8k count=4000000
4000000+0 records in
4000000+0 records out

real    6m22.904s
user    0m0.717s
sys     0m53.766s

# Fibre Channel SAN
$ time bash -c "dd if=/dev/zero of=/data/test/bigfile bs=8k
count=4000000 && sync"
4000000+0 records in
4000000+0 records out

real    5m58.846s
user   0m1.096s
sys     2m18.026s
$ time dd if=/data/test/bigfile of=/dev/null bs=8k count=4000000
4000000+0 records in
4000000+0 records out

real    14m9.560s
user    0m0.739s
sys     0m53.806s