From: | Dimitri <dimitrik(dot)fr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Erik Jones" <erik(at)myemma(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "PostgreSQL Performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Shared buffers, db transactions commited, and write IO on Solaris |
Date: | 2007-03-30 13:14:35 |
Message-ID: | 5482c80a0703300614x1fe7d9ccy2d414ed87f98db3d@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
>
> You are right in that the page size constraint is lifted in that
> directio cuts out the VM filesystem cache. However, the Solaris
> kernel still issues io ops in terms of its logical block size (which
> we have at the default 8K). It can issue io ops for fragments as
> small as 1/8th of the block size, but Postgres issues its io requests
> in terms of the block size which means that io ops from Postgres will
> be in 8K chunks which is exactly what we see when we look at our
> system io stats. In fact, if any io request is made that isn't a
> multiple of 512 bytes (the disk sector size), the file system
> switches back to the buffered io.
Oh, yes, of course! yes, you still need to respect multiple of 512
bytes block size on read and write - sorry, I was tired :)
Then it's seems to be true - default XLOG block size is 8K, means for
every even small auto-committed transaction we should write 8K?... Is
there any reason to use so big default block size?...
Probably it may be a good idea to put it as 'initdb' parameter? and
have such value per database server?
Rgds,
-Dimitri
>
> >
> > However, to understand TX number mystery I think the only possible
> > solution
> > is to reproduce a small live test:
> >
> > (I'm sure you're aware you can mount/unmount forcedirectio
> > dynamically?)
> >
> > during stable workload do:
> >
> > # mount -o remount,logging /path_to_your_filesystem
> >
> > and check if I/O volume is increasing as well TX numbers
> > than come back:
> >
> > # mount -o remount,forcedirectio /path_to_your_filesystem
> >
> > and see if I/O volume is decreasing as well TX numbers...
>
> That's an excellent idea and I'll run it by the rest of our team
> tomorrow.
>
> erik jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com>
> software developer
> 615-296-0838
> emma(r)
>
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sorin N. Ciolofan | 2007-03-30 13:20:09 | Re: ERROR: out of shared memory |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2007-03-30 11:48:18 | Re: Wrong plan sequential scan instead of an index one |