Re: Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large

From: Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net>
To: Antti Haapala <antti(dot)haapala(at)iki(dot)fi>
Cc: Curtis Faith <curtis(at)galtair(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pgsql-Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large
Date: 2002-10-07 16:20:21
Message-ID: 1034007622.14350.74.camel@mouse.copelandconsulting.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 10:38, Antti Haapala wrote:
> Browsed web and came across this piece of text regarding a Linux-KAIO
> patch by Silicon Graphics...
>

Ya, I have read this before. The problem here is that I'm not aware of
which AIO implementation on Linux is the forerunner nor do I have any
idea how it's implementation or performance details defer from that of
other implementations on other platforms. I know there are at least two
aio efforts underway for Linux. There could yet be others. Attempting
to cite specifics that only pertain to Linux and then, only with a
specific implementation which may or may not be in general use is
questionable. Because of this I simply left it as saying that I believe
my analysis is pessimistic.

Anyone have any idea of Red Hat's Advanced Server uses KAIO or what?

>
> Preliminary experience with KAIO have shown over 35% improvement in
> database performance tests. Unit tests (which only perform I/O) using KAIO
> and Raw I/O have been successful in achieving 93% saturation with 12 disks
> hung off 2 X 40 MB/s Ultra-Wide SCSI channels. We believe that these
> encouraging results are a direct result of implementing a significant
> part of KAIO in the kernel using split-phase I/O while avoiding or
> minimizing the use of any globally contented locks."

The problem here is, I have no idea what they are comparing to (worse
case read/writes which we know PostgreSQL *mostly* isn't suffering
from). If we assume that PostgreSQL's read/write operations are
somewhat optimized (as it currently sounds like they are), I'd seriously
doubt we'd see that big of a difference. On the other hand, I'm hoping
that if an aio postgresql implementation does get done we'll see
something like a 5%-10% performance boost. Even still, I have nothing
to pin that on other than hope. If we do see a notable performance
increase for Linux, I have no idea what it will do for other platforms.

Then, there are all of the issues that Tom brought up about
bloat/uglification and maintainability. So, while I certainly do keep
those remarks in my mind, I think it's best to simply encourage the
effort (or something like it) and help determine where we really sit by
means of empirical evidence.

Greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vince Vielhaber 2002-10-07 16:20:37 reminder for those working on docs
Previous Message Neil Conway 2002-10-07 16:18:46 Re: Moving to PostGres