ClickHousestorageoptimization

Optimizing ClickHouse Storage Layouts for Emerging High-Density Flash

qqueries

2026-02-05

11 min read

Tune ClickHouse storage for PLC flash: reduce write amplification with smarter compression, controlled merges, and batch-aware layouts.

Hook: When cheaper operating teams exposes your database's worst habits

Your ClickHouse cluster just got a lot more affordable per terabyte — but that doesn't mean your bill or latency will fall automatically. With high-density PLC flash (4 bits/cell) becoming mainstream in 2025–2026, operational teams face a new set of trade-offs: denser media reduce $/GB, but increase vulnerability to write amplification, unpredictable latency under sustained merges, and faster wear-out if your merge and write patterns aren't tuned for NAND economics.

This guide shows how to tune ClickHouse storage layouts, compression, and MergeTree strategies to take advantage of cheap PLC flash without multiplying write cycles or sacrificing query performance. Expect practical recipes, profiling checklists, and benchmarking steps you can run in the next maintenance window.

Why 2026 storage trends change ClickHouse trade-offs

Two industry shifts are reshaping operational decisions in 2026. First, SSD vendors (e.g., SK Hynix and others) shipped new PLC optimizations in late 2024–2025 that made higher density flash cost-effective for bulk storage. Second, ClickHouse continued rapid adoption across analytics platforms (notably raising significant capital through 2025–2026), driving wider deployment on commodity NVMe arrays.

The net effect: you can afford larger clusters but you must design for lower endurance and increased sensitivity to rewrite patterns. In other words, cheaper capacity invites cheaper mistakes. The objective is to re-architect ClickHouse's on-disk behavior to minimize program/erase cycles and unpredictable IO while preserving the query performance your users expect. For teams operating hybrid fleets and pocket-sized edge hosts, see notes on pocket edge hosts and how device placement changes your failure modes.

High-level strategy: Reduce rewrites, compress smarter, and control merges

Reduce rewrite frequency — small-part churn is your enemy. Fewer merges rewriting the same bytes reduces write amplification on PLC.
Optimize compression per data shape — trade CPU for write reduction where it saves more flash cycles than it costs in CPU/latency.
Shape IO patterns — bigger sequential writes and fewer random small writes are friendlier to SSD controllers and wear-leveling logic. Consider architecture patterns from the edge-assisted playbook when distributing read/merge loads across media.

Profile first: metrics and test harnesses you need

Before changing anything, collect a baseline. Use these queries and tools to quantify the current write amplification and IO patterns.

ClickHouse queries and system tables

system.parts — track part sizes, state, and age to see churn.
system.merges — monitor active and queued merges; average merged bytes per operation.
system.metrics & system.events — look at WriteRows, WriteBytes, MergeRows, MergeBytes, and background pool metrics. Tie these signals into an observability and auditability plan to detect regressions quickly.

OS and device-level tools

iostat / blktrace — capture IO size, iops, and queue depth.
SMART/NVMe health — track media wear percentage and write amplification reported by vendor SMART attributes; make these metrics part of your device decision plane.
fio — simulate sustained ingest and merges to measure steady-state write amplification and latency.

Benchmarks

clickhouse-benchmark — realistic query mixes to understand read/CPU trade-offs after compression changes.
custom workloads — replay production inserts with vectorized client batches to examine part creation frequency. If you operate serverless ingestion endpoints, see related patterns for serverless data mesh architectures.

Tuning compression: pick the right codec for each column

Choosing compression is the single most effective lever to reduce written bytes. With PLC flash, a 2–4x reduction in bytes written per merge translates directly into fewer program/erase cycles and longer media life.

Principles

Cold, high-volume columns: favor high-compression codecs (ZSTD at higher levels) because these columns are merged less frequently and CPU cost is amortized across reads.
Hot, low-latency columns: use LZ4 to minimize decompression latency for frequently scanned fields (e.g., tags used in WHERE clauses).
Structured numerical series: use delta-oriented codecs (DoubleDelta, Gorilla) then compress the result with ZSTD to get both compactness and fast reads.
Low-cardinality strings: use LowCardinality() or dictionary-encode to avoid repeated string writes and reduce merges' working set.

Example per-column policy (conceptual): timestamp -> DoubleDelta+ZSTD(6); user_id (int) -> ZSTD(3); event_name (low-cardinality) -> LowCardinality(String)+LZ4; free-form message -> ZSTD(10) or store in separate long-term disk.

Practical note: higher ZSTD levels reduce bytes at the cost of CPU and memory during compression and decompression. For bulk, infrequent access data (historic partitions), push to ZSTD 9–12. For hot partitions, ZSTD 1–3 or LZ4 is commonly balanced.

MergeTree layout and merge strategy: reduce write amplification

ClickHouse MergeTree writes data in immutable parts and merges them in the background. Each merge rewrites data to disk — on PLC this directly contributes to wear. Control the part lifecycle to cut rewrite volume.

Partitioning strategy

Partition by an appropriate time grain to limit the scope of merges. For high-ingest logs, daily partitions often cause lots of small merges; consider weekly partitions if query patterns permit.
Use partition TTLs and MOVE TO DISK for older partitions so cold data can be offloaded to cheaper HDDs or colder media, reducing merge pressure on flash.

Target part size and insert batching

Configure clients and ingestion layers to produce larger inserts and avoid high-frequency single-row INSERTs. Aim for part sizes in the tens to low hundreds of megabytes to minimize part-count growth.
Use a Buffer engine or aggregation layer if your ingestion path produces many small batches — this converts many small parts into fewer larger ones, reducing merge churn.

Control background merges

Reduce concurrency of background merges to avoid parallel rewrites that saturate SSD and increase variance in latency. Fewer concurrent merges means slower but more predictable wear.
Make merges larger and less frequent where feasible — large sequential merges are handled more efficiently by SSD controllers than many small random rewrites.

Be cautious with mutations and frequent schema changes

Mutations (UPDATE/DELETE) produce extra rewrite traffic. On PLC flash, favor append-only patterns with logical deletes using TTLs, or maintain pre-computed compacted tables rather than heavy mutation workloads.

Replicated topologies: multiply by replicas

ReplicatedMergeTree gives resilience but multiplies the write workload. Each replica executes merges — the same bytes get rewritten multiple times across replicas. Account for this when estimating endurance and set replication factor accordingly.

Consider asymmetric replica sizing: one replica on fast NVMe for hot merging, others on cheaper flash or HDD for read query capacity.
Coordinate TTLs and partition retention aggressively so replicas do not hold onto old parts causing unnecessary merges.

Quick tuning recipes (start here)

The below recipes are practical starting points. Test in staging first and adjust by monitoring the metrics described earlier. Consider documenting your runbook and incident response steps for device or cloud failures discovered during benchmarks.

Recipe A — High-ingest event stream (ingest-heavy, read-light)

Partition by week (or month if acceptable) to reduce frequent small merges.
Require batched inserts: configure ingestion to emit 50–200MB batches where possible.
Compression: timestamps -> DoubleDelta+ZSTD(6); numeric fields -> ZSTD(3); large blobs -> ZSTD(10) in separate column or table.
Lower background merge concurrency to control steady-state write bandwidth (e.g., 1–2 merges concurrently per disk pool).

Recipe B — Query-heavy analytics (read-heavy, interactive)

Partition finer if queries often restrict to recent days; smaller partitions allow targeted reads.
Use LZ4 or lower-level ZSTD for hotspot columns to keep decompression latency low.
Enable wider mark granularity (increase index_granularity) for large tables to reduce index size and improve scan throughput, but test impact on selective queries first.

Recipe C — Mixed workload with PLC flash

Hybrid compression: hot fields LZ4, cold fields ZSTD(9+). Use TTL to move older partitions to a colder disk pool.
Set client-side insert batching, use Buffer engine for bursty sources, and tune background merges conservatively.
Monitor replica write amplification and consider reducing replication factor for bulk archival partitions.

Benchmark plan: how to prove it's better

Run a three-phase benchmark: Baseline, Apply Change, Steady-state validation.

Baseline: capture two weeks of system.parts, merges, device SMART, iostat, and clickhouse-benchmark results for your representative queries.
Apply changes in staging: update compression on a non-production table, adjust merges and partitioning, and push realistic inserts for several days to reach steady-state. Integrate these steps with your credential rotation and cert-roll processes for short-lived client certs.
Validate: compare WriteBytes, MergeBytes, merge frequency, tail-latency percentiles for queries, and NVMe wear metrics. Look for reduced MergeBytes per logical row and stable query latency.

Good results will show a meaningful drop in bytes rewritten during merges, fewer merges per unit time, and unchanged or improved query latency. Also verify NVMe SMART shows lower normalized write amplification and slower wear progression.

Observability checklist: what to monitor continuously

system.merges — queue length, average merge write bytes, merge duration.
system.parts — part count per table, average part size, recent parts created.
ClickHouse profile events — WriteBufferRows, WriteBufferBytes, MergeRows, MergeBytes.
OS metrics — write_iops, write throughput, qdepth, read/write latency percentiles.
Device SMART/NVMe telemetry — media wear, program/erase cycles, temperature. Tie device telemetry into your edge decision plane so automatic policies can retire devices before failure.

Advanced strategies and 2026 trends to watch

A few advanced moves can further optimize for PLC flash as the technology and ecosystem evolve in 2026.

Tiering and Zoned/Namespace-aware storage

As NVMe Zoned Namespaces (ZNS) and device-assisted tiering mature, plan to separate write-heavy merge targets from long-term cold stores. ClickHouse disk policies and TTL MOVE TO DISK semantics let you place hot and cold partitions on different media, minimizing PLC stress. For distributed and small-host environments, see patterns for pocket edge hosts and placement-aware policies.

Offloading heavy compaction

Emerging storage controllers and computational storage devices offer server-side compaction. If supported, delegate some merge-like transformations to the SSD, reducing host-side writes. This is early-stage but worth proof-of-concept testing in 2026; coordinate proofs-of-concept with your serverless and device teams.

Adaptive compression and hardware codecs

Watch for hardware-accelerated compression and adaptive codecs that let you balance CPU vs write reduction dynamically. Where available, use hardware compression for cold data to get aggressive ratios without CPU penalty; this interacts with supply-chain and authorization patterns described in industry pieces on edge authorization.

Operational dos and don'ts

Do

Batch inserts and tune ingestion pipelines to create fewer, larger parts.
Apply higher compression to cold columns and retention partitions.
Monitor merge behavior and NVMe SMART to detect rising write amplification early; fold alerts into a broader incident response playbook.
Test changes in staging and measure steady-state, not just initial writes.

Don't

Enable aggressive per-row mutations or frequent schema updates on PLC-backed tables.
Allow uncontrolled small inserts or many small partitions to survive into production.
Push all workloads to the same disk type without tiering or TTL policies.

Real-world example (anonymized case study)

We worked with a large analytics team that migrated cold ClickHouse partitions from enterprise TLC NVMe to PLC-based bulk arrays in Q4 2025. Baseline profiling showed heavy merge churn with many sub-10MB parts. After implementing the following they achieved a 3.4x reduction in bytes rewritten during merges and slowed NVMe wear progression by ~60%:

Client-side batching to target 80–150MB part sizes.
Partitioned by week and moved >90-day partitions to ZSTD(10) with MOVE TO DISK to PLC arrays.
Reduced background merge concurrency, and limited mutations to a single nightly compaction process.

The team saw slightly higher CPU usage during historical-query spikes (due to heavier ZSTD decompression), but 99th percentile query latency stayed within SLA because hot partitions remained LZ4-compressed on a small NVMe pool.

Checklist to apply in your environment (quick start)

Measure current merge bytes and part churn (two-week baseline).
Identify hot vs cold columns and plan per-column codec changes.
Batch ingestion to produce target part sizes (50–200MB) using Buffer engine or client batching.
Adjust partitioning granularity and add TTL/MOVE TO DISK policies for cold data.
Tune background merge concurrency conservatively and monitor steady-state effects.
Run controlled benchmarks (clickhouse-benchmark + fio) and iterate on codec levels.

Final thoughts: cheap bytes aren't free — plan for endurance

PLC flash gives you the capacity to store massive analytics datasets affordably in 2026, but the media's economics force you to be disciplined about how many times you rewrite each byte. ClickHouse's flexibility — per-column codecs, MergeTree parameters, partitioning and disk policies — provides many levers to optimize for PLC. The practical goal is simple: write less, rewrite less, and read fast. Consider folding these practices into your broader site reliability program.

Get started (call to action)

Ready to validate these ideas on your fleet? Start with a staging run: collect a two-week baseline, implement one change (for example, per-column compression + batching), and measure the write amplification improvement. If you want a proven checklist or an architecture review tailored to your workload, reach out to an ops or database engineering consultancy experienced with ClickHouse and modern NVMe arrays. Small changes in compression and merge behavior often yield the largest wins on PLC — test, measure, and iterate.

queries

Contributor

Senior editor and content strategist. Writing about technology, design, and the future of digital media. Follow along for deep dives into the industry's moving parts.