Matthew Wakeling <matthew@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 9 Apr 2009, Grzegorz Jaœkiewicz wrote: >> acording to kernel folks, anticipatory scheduler is even better for >> dbs. Oh well, it probably means everyone has to test it on their >> own at the end of day. > > But the anticipatory scheduler basically makes the huge assumption > that you have one single disc in the system that takes a long time > to seek from one place to another. This assumption fails on both > RAID arrays and SSDs, so I'd be interested to see some numbers to > back that one up. Yeah, we're running on servers with at least 4 effective spindles, with some servers having several dozen effective spindles. Assuming one is not very effective. The setting which seemed sluggish for our environment was the anticipatory scheduler, so the kernel guys apparently aren't thinking about the type of load we have on the hardware we have. -Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
