Re: Configuration Recommendations

From: Jan Nielsen <jan(dot)sture(dot)nielsen(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Configuration Recommendations
Date: 2012-05-19 15:47:50
Message-ID: CANxH4hH07eZRPe6Bvq3Op+taeWd2hz_Z9EqOFA5K35m31-MKPw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

After seeing less much performance during pg_dump and pg_restore operations
from a 10x15k SAN RAID1+1 XFS mount (
allocsize=256m,attr2,logbufs=8,logbsize=256k,noatime,nobarrier) than the
local-storage 2x15k RAID1 EXT4 mount, I ran the following test of the
effect of read-ahead (RA):

for t in `seq 1 1 10`
do
for drive in `ls /dev/sd[b-z]`
do
for ra in 256 512 `seq 1024 1024 70000`
do
echo benchmark-test: $drive $ra
blockdev --setra $ra $drive
hdparm -t $drive
hdparm -T $drive
echo benchmark-test-complete: $drive $ra
done
done
done

In this test, the local mount's buffered reads perform best around RA~10k @
150MB/sec then starts a steady decline. The SAN mount has a similar but
more subtle decline with a maximum around RA~5k @ 80MB/sec but with much
greater variance. I was surprised at the 80MB/sec for the SAN - I was
expecting 150MB/sec - and I'm also surprised at the variance. I understand
that there are many more elements involved for the SAN: more drives,
network overhead & latency, iscsi, etc. but I'm still surprised.

Is this expected behavior for a SAN mount or is this a hint at some
misconfiguration? Thoughts?

Cheers,

Jan

Attachment Content-Type Size
image/png 11.9 KB
image/png 12.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Nielsen 2012-05-19 19:11:49 Re: Configuration Recommendations
Previous Message Jan Nielsen 2012-05-17 17:54:47 Re: Configuration Recommendations