From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 16 11:04:58 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A4C71065672 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:04:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-stable@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CD0B8FC15 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:04:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OwCGr-0003LC-Rj for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 13:04:53 +0200 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 13:04:53 +0200 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 13:04:53 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 13:04:43 +0200 Lines: 29 Message-ID: References: <201009152007.17320.Pascal.Stumpf@cubes.de> <201009151830.o8FIUWEZ021844@lava.sentex.ca> <4C911AB0.6090901@delphij.net> <4C91AEBF.50502@FreeBSD.org> <20100916084240.GA33879@megatron.madpilot.net> <20100916104236.GB33879@megatron.madpilot.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100518 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: <20100916104236.GB33879@megatron.madpilot.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Subject: Re: MFC of ZFSv15 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:04:58 -0000 On 09/16/10 12:42, Guido Falsi wrote: > Related to this, I have a question. > > Is it convenient to put databases on a compresed filesystem? Apart from > the space advantage, does it give any speed advantage/penalty? It depends on what you do. It will not save you memory usage either since data needs to be decompressed when read. If the database is lightly loaded I don't think there will ever be problems. Also if the database is mostly read-only. If it's used in a heavy loaded read+write environment or if it is CPU-bound, it is probably a bad idea to put it on a compressed file system. > Anyone has some benchmark or objective data about this? I know about this one: http://don.blogs.smugmug.com/2008/10/13/zfs-mysqlinnodb-compression-update/ But it only really measures copy (cp) speeds and compression, not database performance. > Also are we talking about MyISAM or InnoDB tables? Or a mix of those? MyISAM would probably be faster to compress and manage :) http://www.scribd.com/doc/14603831/Optimizing-MySQL-Performance-with-ZFS