| From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "James Mansion" <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, "Scott Carey" <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com>, "Mark Wong" <markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Gabrielle Roth" <gorthx(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Selena Deckelmann" <selenamarie(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Effects of setting linux block device readahead size |
| Date: | 2008-09-11 05:37:09 |
| Message-ID: | dcc563d10809102237s2aa1fa09x1df9276282544342@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 11:21 PM, James Mansion
<james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
>>
>> Average seek time: 4ms
>> Seeks/second: 250
>> Data read/seek: 1MB (read-ahead number goes here)
>> Total read bandwidth: 250MB/s
>>
> Most spinning disks now are nearer to 100MB/s streaming. You've talked
> yourself into twice that, random access!
The fastest cheetahs on this page hit 171MB/second:
http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/products/servers/cheetah/
Are there any drives that have a faster sequential transfer rate out there?
Checked out hitachi's global storage site and they're fastest drive
seems just a tad slower.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2008-09-11 05:56:40 | Re: Effects of setting linux block device readahead size |
| Previous Message | James Mansion | 2008-09-11 05:21:17 | Re: Effects of setting linux block device readahead size |