| From: | "Jeffrey W(dot) Baker" <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Stone <mstone+postgres(at)mathom(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? |
| Date: | 2005-10-03 20:42:31 |
| Message-ID: | 1128372151.28509.1.camel@toonses.gghcwest.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 13:34 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Michael,
>
> > >Realistically, you can't do better than about 25MB/s on a
> > > single-threaded I/O on current Linux machines,
> >
> > What on earth gives you that idea? Did you drop a zero?
>
> Nope, LOTS of testing, at OSDL, GreenPlum and Sun. For comparison, A
> Big-Name Proprietary Database doesn't get much more than that either.
I find this claim very suspicious. I get single-threaded reads in
excess of 1GB/sec with XFS and > 250MB/sec with ext3.
-jwb
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-03 20:48:40 | Re: Vacuum Full Analyze Stalled |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-10-03 20:40:29 | Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-10-03 21:16:15 | Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-10-03 20:40:29 | Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? |