[OT] Slony Triggers pulling down performance?
Just wondering if my 'Perceived' feeling that since implementing slony
for master/slave replication of select tables, my master database
performance is getting slower.
I'm constantly seeing a very high amount of IO wait. ~40-80 according to
vmstat 1
and according to atop. (hdb/hdc = raid1 mirror)
DSK | hdb | busy 83% | read 1052 | write 50 | avio 7 ms |
DSK | hdc | busy 81% | read 1248 | write 49 | avio 6 ms |
Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com (Ow Mun Heng) writes:
Just wondering if my 'Perceived' feeling that since implementing slony
for master/slave replication of select tables, my master database
performance is getting slower.I'm constantly seeing a very high amount of IO wait. ~40-80 according to
vmstat 1and according to atop. (hdb/hdc = raid1 mirror)
DSK | hdb | busy 83% | read 1052 | write 50 | avio 7 ms |
DSK | hdc | busy 81% | read 1248 | write 49 | avio 6 ms |
The triggers generate some extra I/O, as they go off and write tuples
into sl_log_1/sl_log_2, so there's certainly a cost, there.
When you pull data from sl_log_1/sl_log_2, that will have a cost, too.
Replication does not come at zero cost...
--
(format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "linuxdatabases.info")
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/finances.html
"Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
-- First Baron Acton, 1834 - 1902
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 03:14:41PM +0800, Ow Mun Heng wrote:
Just wondering if my 'Perceived' feeling that since implementing slony
for master/slave replication of select tables, my master database
performance is getting slower.
It imposes a performance penalty, yes.
A
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 14:57 -0500, Chris Browne wrote:
Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com (Ow Mun Heng) writes:
Just wondering if my 'Perceived' feeling that since implementing slony
for master/slave replication of select tables, my master database
performance is getting slower.I'm constantly seeing a very high amount of IO wait. ~40-80 according to
vmstat 1and according to atop. (hdb/hdc = raid1 mirror)
DSK | hdb | busy 83% | read 1052 | write 50 | avio 7 ms |
DSK | hdc | busy 81% | read 1248 | write 49 | avio 6 ms |The triggers generate some extra I/O, as they go off and write tuples
into sl_log_1/sl_log_2, so there's certainly a cost, there.When you pull data from sl_log_1/sl_log_2, that will have a cost, too.
Replication does not come at zero cost...
I've been battling with this issus for the past week and that prompted a
few changes in the manner I pull the data and in the location where i
store the data. I ended up implementing partitioning on the 2 main
largest (problematic) tables and put it intp weekly rotation and moved
the broke the 3 disk raid1(1 spare) spare disk and used that as the
slony-I sl_log_1/sl_log_2 tablespace.
Now, everything is back to normal. (until I break it again!!) IO Wait is
hovering between 0-40%