| From: | Terje Elde <terje(at)elde(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Blocks read for index scans |
| Date: | 2006-04-19 02:35:11 |
| Message-ID: | 4445A1DF.6000705@elde.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>> That said, it's the transactions against disk that typically matter. On
>> FreeBSD, you can get an impression of this using 'systat -vmstat', and
>> watch the KB/t column for your drives.
>>
>
> On a related note, you know of any way to determine the breakdown
> between read activity and write activity on FreeBSD? vmstat, systat,
> iostat all only return aggregate info. :(
>
Can't think of a right way to do this ATM, but for a lab-type setup to
get an idea, you could set up a gmirror volume, then choose a balancing
algorithm to only read from one of the disks. The effect should be that
writes go to both, while reads only go to one. Activity on the
write-only disk would give you an idea of the write activity, and
(read/write disk - write-only disk) would give you an idea of the
reads. I have to admit though, seems like quite a bit of hassle, and
I'm not sure how good the numbers would be, given that at least some of
the info (KB/transaction) are totals, it'd require a bit of math to get
decent numbers. But at least it's something.
Terje
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2006-04-19 04:47:40 | Re: merge>hash>loop |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2006-04-19 02:21:35 | Re: SELECT FOR UPDATE performance is bad |