Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 08:01:13 -0700 From: Mark Wong <markwkm@gmail.com> To: Anthony Pankov <ap00@mail.ru> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Selena Deckelmann <selenamarie@gmail.com>, Gabrielle Roth <gorthx@gmail.com> Subject: Re: filesystem performance Message-ID: <70c01d1d0905060801r1eb7b9f7o5c1c9505130a7667@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5871156390.20090506132550@mail.ru> References: <70c01d1d0905042230v3357622cgf4c8e52a2a4ead96@mail.gmail.com> <5871156390.20090506132550@mail.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:25 AM, Anthony Pankov <ap00@mail.ru> wrote: > Hello Mark, > > May i ask a question while more expierenced people is waking up? > > I don't fully understand the target. For what filesystem should be > optimized? > > I expect a patterns of recorded IO calls when pgsql perform typical > operations with statistics and in-depth analysis. The angle we're trying to look at is from a sizing perspective. In order words we want to have an idea of what to expect before we do it. For example, if I have 10 drives, what can I expect if I configure them in a RAID 10 configuration? > Are you sure there is =B1 strong relation between fio benchmark result an= d > PostgreSQL performance? Sorry, this was something I was trying to make clearer originally. No, I don't think there is a strong relationship between fio and PostgreSQL, but these i/o patterns we are simulating do give us a rough estimate of we can expect. For example, in workloads with lots of update and inserts into a database will generate a lot of sequential writes to the database logs, which we can physically isolate onto it's own lun. Similarly, in some warehousing applications there may be a table that is always scanned and read sequential, which also can be on its own physical lun. Regards, Mark
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?70c01d1d0905060801r1eb7b9f7o5c1c9505130a7667>