Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Mark Kirkwood
Subject Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent
Date
Msg-id dadb1945-062f-c565-26ee-d334898d7cf5@catalyst.net.nz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent  (Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>)
Responses Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent  (Charles Nadeau <charles.nadeau@gmail.com>)
Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent  (Charles Nadeau <charles.nadeau@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Thinking about this a bit more - if somewhat more blazing performance is
needed, then this could be achieved via losing the RAID card and
spinning disks altogether and buying 1 of the NVME or SATA solid state
products: e.g

- Samsung 960 Pro or Evo 2 TB (approx 1 or 2 GB/s seq scan speeds and
200K IOPS)

- Intel S3610 or similar 1.2 TB (500 MB/s seq scan and 30K IOPS)


The Samsung needs an M.2 port on the mobo (but most should have 'em -
and if not PCIe X4 adapter cards are quite cheap). The Intel is a bit
more expensive compared to the Samsung, and is slower but has a longer
lifetime. However for your workload the Sammy is probably fine.

regards

Mark

On 15/07/17 11:09, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Ah yes - that seems more sensible (but still slower than I would
> expect for 5 disks RAID 0).



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Mark Kirkwood
Date:
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent
Next
From: Charles Nadeau
Date:
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent