| From: | Rick Otten <rottenwindfish(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vitaliy Garnashevich <vgarnashevich(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, hzzhangjiazhi <hzzhangjiazhi(at)corp(dot)netease(dot)com>, Gary Doades <gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk>, "pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: effective_io_concurrency on EBS/gp2 |
| Date: | 2018-02-23 15:23:03 |
| Message-ID: | CAMAYy4K2tqAsqfaQmy0_AhE-Unxmk_6gRrmxdfJm=EdCrXO7WQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Vitaliy Garnashevich <
vgarnashevich(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Anyway, there are still some strange things happening when
> effective_io_concurrency is non-zero.
>
> ...
>
> Vitaliy
>
>
I was researching whether I could optimize a concatenated lvm2 volume when
I have disks of different speeds (concatenated - not striped - and I think
I can if I concatenate them in the right order - still testing on that
front), when I came across this article from a few years ago:
http://www.techforce.com.br/content/lvm-raid-xfs-and-ext3-file-systems-tuning-small-files-massive-heavy-load-concurrent-parallel
In the article he talks about the performance of parallel io on different
file systems.
Since I am already running XFS that led me to this tunable:
http://xfs.org/docs/xfsdocs-xml-dev/XFS_Filesystem_Structure/tmp/en-US/html/Allocation_Groups.html
Which brought me back to this discussion about effective_io_concurrency
from a couple of weeks ago. I noticed that the recent round of tests being
discussed never mentioned the file system used. Was it XFS? Does changing
the agcount change the behaviour?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Laurenz Albe | 2018-02-23 15:26:55 | Re: need advice to tune postgresql |
| Previous Message | MichaelDBA | 2018-02-23 15:03:12 | Re: need advice to tune postgresql |