1.
PostgreSQL on EXT3/4, XFS,
BTRFS and ZFS
comparing modern (Linux) file systems
Tomas Vondra <tomas@2ndquadrant.com>

2.
Linux file systems
● plenty of choices, with different
– goals, features, tuning options
– maturity level, reliability
– ext3/4, XFS
– traditional, design from the 90s
– improving over time, reasonably “modern”
● BTRFS, ZFS
– next-generation, new architecture / design
● other (not included in this talk)
– log-organized file systems, distributed, clustered, ...

3.
EXT3, EXT4, XFS

4.
EXT3, EXT4, XFS - history
● ext3 (2001) / ext4 (2008)
– evolution of original Linux filesystem (ext, ext2, ...)
– continuous improvements / fixes
● XFS (2002)
– originally from SGI Irix 5.3 (1994)
– 2000 released under GPL
– 2002 merged into 2.5.36
● both are
– reliable journaling file systems
– proven by time on many deployments

5.
EXT3, EXT4, XFS - features
● traditional design with journal
● not handling
– multiple devices
– volume management
– snapshots
– ...
● need additional layers for those things
– hardware RAID
– software RAID (dm)
– LVM / LVM2

6.
EXT3, EXT4, XFS - evolution
● conceived in times of rotational storage
– mostly work with SSD
– stop-gap for future storage (NVRAM, ...)
● evolution, not a revolution (mostly)
– fixing bugs (some real, some imaginary)
– adding features (e.g. TRIM, barriers, ...)
– scalability improvements (metadata, ...)
– be careful when reading old articles / benchmarks
– be vary of anecdotal evidence (without context)
– synthetic benchmarks are misleading

7.
EXT3, EXT4, XFS - sources
● Linux Filesystems: Where did they come from?
(Dave Chinner @ linux.conf.au 2014)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMcVdZk7wV8
● Ted Ts'o on the ext4 Filesystem
(Ted Ts'o, NYLUG, 2013)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mYDFr5T4tY
● XFS: There and Back … and There Again?
(Dave Chinner @ Vault 2015)
https://lwn.net/Articles/638546/
● XFS: Recent and Future Adventures in Filesystem Scalability
(Dave Chinner, linux.conf.au 2012)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FegjLbCnoBw
● XFS: the filesystem of the future?
(Jonathan Corbet, Dave Chinner, LWN, 2012)
http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/

8.
BTRFS, ZFS

9.
BTRFS, ZFS - goals
● ideas
– integrate the layers
– design for commodity hardware (expect failures)
– design for huge data volumes
● so that we get …
– flexible management
– built-in snapshotting
– compression, deduplication
– checksums
– ...

10.
BTRFS, ZFS - history
● BTRFS
– merged in 2009, but considered “experimental”
– on-disk format “stable” (1.0)
– some claim it’s “stable” but I doubt that …
– (What are the criteria for filesystem to be “stable”?)
● ZFS
– originally from Solaris, but got Oracled :-(
– today a bit fragmented development
– available on other BSD systems (FreeBSD)
– “ZFS on Linux” project (CDDL vs. GPL)

11.
Tuning options

12.
Generic tuning options
● TRIM (discard)
– enable / disable TRIM on SSDs
– impacts garbage collection / wear leveling
● write barriers
– prevent disk from optimizing order of writes
– still may loose data, but no filesystem corruption
– write cache + battery => disable barriers
● SSD alignment
– alignment on SSDs matter (pages, blocks, …)
– not dedicated tuning options (can use stripe unit / width)

13.
BTRFS tuning options
● nodatacow (BTRFS)
– disable copy on write
– still can do snapshots (will do necessary COW)
– disables checksums (needs full COW)
● zfs_arc_max
– limit the size of ARC cache
– should be released automatically, but ...

14.
BTRFS tuning options
● recordsize=8kB
– match the fs page with PostgreSQL page
● ashift=13 (8kB)
– align the writes to SSD pages
● primarycache=metadata
– prevent double buffering (shared buffers)
http://open-zfs.org/wiki/Performance_tuning

15.
file systems

16.
● ext3 (default)
● default
● ext4
● default
● discard, nobarrier, stripe-width
● xfs
● default
● LVM
● LVM + snapshot
● discard, nobarrier
● discard, nobarrier, agcount, sunit/swidth

17.
● btrfs
● default
● nodatacow
● nodiscard (+fstrim)
● zfs
● default
● recordsize=8k, ashift=13, primarycache=metadata (open-zfs)
● recordsize=8k, ashift=13, max_arc_size=5GB (custom)

18.
benchmarks

19.
pgbench (TPC-B)
● transactional benchmark
– small queries (access by PK, ...)
● modes
– read-only
– read-write
● scales
– small (~200MB)
– medium (~50% RAM)
– large (~200% RAM)

20.
TPC-DS
● warehouse, analytical
– large amounts of data
– queries processing a lot of data
● complex queries
– aggregations
– joins
– CTEs
– …
● successor to TPC-H
– more elaborate / realistic

21.
System
● PostgreSQL 9.4.1
● Gentoo with kernel 3.17
● CPU: Intel i5-2500k
– 4 cores @ 3.3 GHz (3.7GHz)
– 6MB cache
– 2011-2013
● 8GB RAM (DDR3 1333)
● SSD Intel S3500 100GB (SATA)

22.
pgbench read-only

23.
btrfs
btrfs-nodatacow
btrfs-nodiscard-fstrim
ext3
ext4
ext4-discard-nobarrier-stripe
xfs
xfs-discard-lvm-snapshot
xfs-discard-nobarrier
xfs-lvm
xfs-tuned-agcount-su-sw
zfs
zfs-tuned
zfs-tuned-2
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
pgbench / small (150MB) / read-only
transactions per second

24.
btrfs
btrfs-nodatacow
btrfs-nodiscard-fstrim
ext3
ext4
ext4-discard-nobarrier-stripe
xfs
xfs-discard-lvm-snapshot
xfs-discard-nobarrier
xfs-lvm
xfs-tuned-agcount-su-sw
zfs
zfs-tuned
zfs-tuned-2
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
pgbench / medium (50% RAM) / read-only
transactions per second

25.
btrfs
btrfs-nodatacow
btrfs-nodiscard-fstrim
ext3
ext4
ext4-discard-lvm-snapshot
ext4-discard-nobarrier-stripe
xfs
xfs-discard-lvm-snapshot
xfs-discard-nobarrier
xfs-lvm
xfs-tuned-agcount-su-sw
zfs
zfs-tuned
zfs-tuned-2
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000
pgbench / large (200% RAM) / read-only
transactions per second

26.
pgbench read-write

27.
btrfs
btrfs-nodatacow
btrfs-nodiscard-fstrim
ext3
ext4
ext4-discard-nobarrier-stripe
xfs
xfs-discard-lvm-snapshot
xfs-discard-nobarrier
xfs-lvm
xfs-tuned-agcount-su-sw
zfs
zfs-tuned
zfs-tuned-2
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
pgbench / small (150MB) / read-write
transactions per second

28.
btrfs
btrfs-nodatacow
btrfs-nodiscard-fstrim
ext3
ext4
ext4-discard-nobarrier-stripe
xfs
xfs-discard-lvm-snapshot
xfs-discard-nobarrier
xfs-lvm
xfs-tuned-agcount-su-sw
zfs
zfs-tuned
zfs-tuned-2
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
pgbench / medium (50% RAM) / read-write
transactions per second

29.
btrfs
btrfs-nodatacow
btrfs-nodiscard-fstrim
ext3
ext4
ext4-discard-lvm-snapshot
ext4-discard-nobarrier-stripe
xfs
xfs-discard-lvm-snapshot
xfs-discard-nobarrier
xfs-lvm
xfs-tuned-agcount-su-sw
zfs
zfs-tuned
zfs-tuned-2
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
pgbench / large (200% RAM) / read-write
transactions per second

30.
performance variability

31.
EXT / XFS conclusions
EXT4
●
good “default” choice
●
disable barriers (with protected write cache)
●
tune alignment to match the SSD
●
very “smooth” results
XFS
●
does not outperform ext4 (in this test)
●
not much worse, if properly tuned
● disable write barriers, tune alignment to SSD
●
more anomalies than ext4 (sudden performance drops, ...)

32.
BTRFS & ZFS

33.
TPC-DS

34.
mkfs / mount options
● ext4, xfs
– mkfs.ext4 ­E stripe­width=256 /dev/sda1
– mkfs.xfs ­d su=512k,sw=1 ­l su=512k ­f /dev/sda1
– mount: defaults,noatime,discard,nobarrier
● btrfs
– mkfs.btrfs ­l 8192 ­L pgdata /dev/sda1
– mount: defaults,noatime,ssd,discard,nobarrier
[compress=lzo]
● zfs
– zpool create pgpool /dev/sda1
– zfs create pgpool/pgdata
– zfs set recordsize=8k pgpool/pgdata
– zfs set atime=off pgpool/pgdata

35.
ext4 xfs btrfs btrfs (lzo) zfs zfs (lz4)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
TPC-DS load duration
on EXT4, XFS, BTRFS and ZFS
data indexes
duration[seconds]

36.
ext4 xfs btrfs btrfs lzo zfs zfs (lz4)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
TPC-DS query performance
EXT4, XFS, BTRFS and ZFS
duration[seconds]

37.
ext4 xfs btrfs btrfs lzo zfs zfs (lz4)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
TPC-DS space used
on EXT4, XFS, BTRFS and ZFS
size[GB]

38.
TPC-DS summary
● EXT4, XFS, BTRFS
– about the same performance
● compression is nice
– uncompressed: 60GB
– compressed: ~30GB
● mostly storage capacity, queries not faster
● ZFS much slower :-(