Greg Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
> > ISTM that you *should* be able to see an improvement on even
> > single-spindle systems, due to better overlapping of CPU and I/O effort.
> The earlier synthetic tests I did:
> Showed a substantial speedup even in the single spindle case on a couple
> of systems, but one didn't really seem to benefit. So we could theorize
> that Robert's test system is more like that one. If someone can help out
> with making a more formal test case showing this in action, I'll dig into
> the details of what's different between that system and the others.
I think for an I/O-bound workload on a single drive system you would
need a drive that did some kind of tagged queuing (reordering/grouping)
of requests to see a benefit from the patch.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Gregory Stark||Date: 2009-01-02 20:59:35|
|Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?|
|Previous:||From: Gregory Stark||Date: 2009-01-02 20:40:49|
|Subject: Re: posix_fadvise v22|