Re: Read/Write block sizes - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Michael Stone
Subject Re: Read/Write block sizes
Date
Msg-id 20050823232424.GM8667@mathom.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Read/Write block sizes  (Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>)
List pgsql-performance
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 06:09:09PM -0400, Chris Browne wrote:
>What we have been finding, as RAID controllers get smarter, is that it
>is getting increasingly futile to try to attach knobs to 'disk stuff;'
>it is *way* more effective to add a few more spindles to an array than
>it is to fiddle with which disks are to be allocated to what database
>'objects.'

That statement doesn't say anything about trying to maximize performance
to or from a disk array. Yes, controllers are getting smarter--but they
aren't omnicient. IME an I/O bound sequential table scan doesn't get
data moving off the disk nearly as fast as say, a dd with a big ibs.
Why? There's obviously a lot of factors at work, but one of those
factors is that the raid controller can optimize "grab this meg" a lot
more than it can optimize "grab this 8k".

Mike Stone

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Michael Stone
Date:
Subject: Re: Read/Write block sizes (Was: Caching by Postgres)
Next
From: PFC
Date:
Subject: Re: Caching by Postgres