Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 8K recordsize bad on ZFS?

From: Dimitri <dimitrik(dot)fr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 8K recordsize bad on ZFS?
Date: 2010-05-10 19:26:21
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
As I said, the record size is applied on the file creation :-)
so by copying your data from one directory to another one you've made
the new record size applied on the newly created files :-)  (equal to
backup restore if there was not enough space)..

Did you try to redo the same but still keeping record size equal 8K ? ;-)

I think the problem you've observed is simply related to the
copy-on-write nature of ZFS - if you bring any modification to the
data your sequential order of pages was broken with a time, and
finally the sequential read was transformed to the random access.. But
once you've re-copied your files again - the right order was applied

BTW, 8K is recommended for OLTP workloads, but for DW you may stay
with 128K without problem.


On 5/10/10, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> On 5/9/10 1:45 AM, Dimitri wrote:
>> Josh,
>> it'll be great if you explain how did you change the records size to
>> 128K? - as this size is assigned on the file creation and cannot be
>> changed later - I suppose that you made a backup of your data and then
>> process a full restore.. is it so?
> You can change the recordsize of the zpool dynamically, then simply copy
> the data directory (with PostgreSQL shut down) to a new directory on
> that zpool.  This assumes that you have enough space on the zpool, of
> course.
> We didn't test how it would work to let the files in the Postgres
> instance get gradually replaced by "natural" updating.
> --
>                                   -- Josh Berkus
>                                      PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2010-05-10 19:30:27
Subject: Re: 8K recordsize bad on ZFS?
Previous:From: Ivan VorasDate: 2010-05-10 19:13:54
Subject: Re: 8K recordsize bad on ZFS?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group