Re: Need help with 8.4 Performance Testing

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com>
Cc: "jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8(at)verizon(dot)net>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Need help with 8.4 Performance Testing
Date: 2008-12-09 22:38:35
Message-ID: 22285.1228862315@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> writes:
> Which brings this back around to the point I care the most about:
> I/O per second will diminish as the most common database performance limiting factor in Postgres 8.4's lifetime, and become almost irrelevant in 8.5's.
> Becoming more CPU efficient will become very important, and for some, already is. The community needs to be proactive on this front.
> This turns a lot of old assumptions on their head, from the database down through the OS and filesystem. We're bound to run into many surprises due to this major shift in something that has had its performance characteristics taken for granted for decades.

Hmm ... I wonder whether this means that the current work on
parallelizing I/O (the posix_fadvise patch in particular) is a dead
end. Because what that is basically going to do is expend more CPU
to improve I/O efficiency. If you believe this thesis then that's
not the road we want to go down.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Wilson 2008-12-09 22:41:33 Re: query plan with index having a btrim is different for strings of different length
Previous Message Scott Carey 2008-12-09 22:05:18 Re: Need help with 8.4 Performance Testing