On 10/10/2010 9:54 AM, Mladen Gogala wrote:

Unfortunately, the problem is in the rather primitive way PostgreSQL
does I/O. It didn't change in 9.0 so there is nothing you could gain by
upgrading. If you execute strace -o /tmp/pg.out -e read <PID of the
sequential scan process> and inspect the file /tmp/pg.out when the query
finishes, you will notice a gazillion of read requests, all of them 8192
bytes in size. That means that PostgreSQL is reading the table block by
block, without any merging of the requests.

I'd be really interested in any measurements you've done to determine the cost of this over doing reads in larger chunks. If they're properly detailed and thought out, the -hackers list is likely to be interested as well.

The Linux kernel, at least, does request merging (and splitting, and merging, and more splitting) along the request path, and I'd personally expect that most of the cost of 8k requests would be in the increased number of system calls, buffer copies, etc required. Measurements demonstrating or contradicting this would be good to see.

It's worth being aware that there are memory costs to doing larger reads, especially when you have many backends each of which want to allocate a larger buffer for reading. If you can use a chunk of shared_buffers as the direct destination for the read that's OK, but otherwise you're up for (1mb-8kb)*num_backends extra memory use on I/O buffers that could otherwise be used as shared_buffers or OS cache.

Async I/O, too, has costs.

> PostgreSQL is in
dire need of something similar and it wouldn't even be that hard to
implement.

I'd really like to see both those assertions backed with data or patches ;-)

Personally, I know just enough about how PG's I/O path works to suspect that "not that hard to implement" is probably a little ... over-optimistic. Sure, it's not that hard to implement in a new program with no wired-in architectural and design choices; that doesn't mean it's easy to retrofit onto existing code, especially a bunch of co-operating processes with their own buffer management.

--
Craig Ringer

Tech-related writing at http://soapyfrogs.blogspot.com/

--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

Reply via email to