Re: 回复: [External] Re: Separate volumes

From: Erik Brandsberg <erik(at)heimdalldata(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Lu Dillon <ludi_1981(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Iuri Sampaio <iuri(dot)sampaio(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ed Behn <ed(dot)behn(at)collins(dot)com>, MichaelDBA <MichaelDBA(at)sqlexec(dot)com>, Steve Midgley <science(at)misuse(dot)org>, "pgsql-sql(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-sql(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 回复: [External] Re: Separate volumes
Date: 2020-04-10 21:26:07
Message-ID: CAFcck8G4gtax5g-a8gMB3BiDJghA7XYYmxoM1czwBmjptMyp3Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

It isn't exactly two-tiered storage, all data gets written to the
underlying disk as quickly as it can, but the random IO that indexes use
will end up in the local cache, so to provide faster access. Writes will
take a temporary stop in the local nvme as well, so that even if it takes a
long time to write to the disk, the upstream DB can move on to the next
task. This provides the effective benefits of splitting the index on local
ssd, while simplifying the management and backup.

On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 5:01 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 04:52:06PM -0400, Erik Brandsberg wrote:
> > A modern filesystem can help avoid even this complexity. As an example,
> I am
> > managing one PG setup that is self-hosted on an AWS EC2 instance, with
> 16TB of
> > raw storage. The bulk of that storage is in ST1, or the cheapest
> rotating disk
> > capacity available in EBS, but is using ZFS as the filesystem (with
> > compression, so realistically about 35TB of raw data). The instance
> type is a
> > Z1d.metal, which has two 900GB NVME drives, which have been divided to
> provide
> > swap space, as well as ZFS read and write caching. This setup has
> largely
> > offset the slow performance of the st1 disks, and kept the performance
> usable
> > (most of the data is legacy, and rarely used). I'm a big fan of
> keeping the
> > DB configuration simple, as it is way too easy to overlook tuning of a
> > filespace for an index, causing performance problems, while if you keep
> it
> > auto-tuning at the filesystem level, it "just works".
>
> You are saying the cloud automatically moves data between the fast and
> slow storage? I know many NAS systems do this, but I have also seen
> problems when NAS systems guess wrong.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
> EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
>
> + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
> + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
>

--
*Erik Brandsberg*
erik(at)heimdalldata(dot)com

www.heimdalldata.com
+1 (866) 433-2824 x 700
[image: AWS Competency Program]
<https://aws.amazon.com/partners/find/partnerdetails/?n=Heimdall%20Data&id=001E000001d9pndIAA>

In response to

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Samed YILDIRIM 2020-04-22 15:50:40 Re: FK constraint question
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2020-04-10 21:01:54 Re: 回复: [External] Re: Separate volumes