| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> |
| Cc: | David Schultz <dschultz(at)uclink(dot)Berkeley(dot)EDU>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... |
| Date: | 2003-08-29 07:38:05 |
| Message-ID: | 3F4F02DD.50905@paradise.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I am not 100% sure that 16K blocksize is the best size, for instance :
Using FreebSD 5.1 - I got the best read and write performance using a
blocksize of 32K with 4K fragments - [ reading and writing 8K blocks,
ufs1 and ufs2 fs ].
I dont have the results in front of me, but I think I tried fs
blocksizes from 4K upwards....
I am also not convinced that using 16K in Pg will be better than 8K (you
would expect sequential performance to improve, but maybe at the expense
of random ....)
regards
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-08-29 08:18:24 | Re: Hardware recommendations to scale to silly load |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-08-29 07:30:06 | Re: Hardware recommendations to scale to silly load |