| From: | "Jeffrey W(dot) Baker" <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Roger Hand <RHand(at)kailea(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Query plan looks OK, but slow I/O - settings advice? |
| Date: | 2005-08-19 06:55:35 |
| Message-ID: | 1124434535.3257.7.camel@noodles |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 10:46 -0700, Roger Hand wrote:
> The disks are ext3 with journalling type of ordered, but this was later changed to writeback with no apparent change in speed.
>
> They're on a Dell poweredge 6650 with LSI raid card, setup as follows:
> 4 disks raid 10 for indexes (145GB) - sdc1
> 6 disks raid 10 for data (220GB) - sdd1
> 2 mirrored disks for logs - sdb1
>
> stripe size is 32k
> cache policy: cached io (am told the controller has bbu)
> write policy: write-back
> read policy: readahead
I assume you are using Linux 2.6. Have you considered booting your
machine with elevator=deadline? You can also change this at runtime
using sysfs.
These read speeds are not too impressive. Perhaps this is a slow
controller. Alternately you might need bigger CPUs.
There's a lot of possibilities, obviously :) I'd start with the
elevator, since that's easily tested.
-jwb
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2005-08-19 07:17:45 | Re: Query plan looks OK, but slow I/O - settings advice? |
| Previous Message | David Hodgkinson | 2005-08-18 22:08:29 | Re: FW: Tx forecast improving harware capabilities. |