| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nikhil Shetty <nikhil(dot)dba04(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Haroldo Kerry <hkerry(at)callix(dot)com(dot)br>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Recommended value for pg_test_fsync |
| Date: | 2020-07-01 19:59:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20200701195958.GA14460@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 11:41:23PM +0530, Nikhil Shetty wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The client has done benchmark tests on available storage using a storage
> benchmark tool and got IOPS of around 14k on iSCSI and around 150k on HBA
> channel, which seems a good number but pg_test_fysnc gives numbers which are
> not reflecting good op/sec. Though pg_test_fysnc result should not be compared
> to benchmark throughput but both are indicative of overall database
> performance.
Well, by definition, pg_test_fsync asks for fsync after every set of
writes. Only the last report, "Non-sync'ed 8kB writes:" gives non-fsync
performance.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marlene Villanueva | 2020-07-11 17:15:27 | Re: Request to help on Query improvement suggestion. |
| Previous Message | Nikhil Shetty | 2020-07-01 18:11:23 | Re: Recommended value for pg_test_fsync |