Re: ext3 journalling type - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Matt Clark
Subject Re: ext3 journalling type
Date
Msg-id 000d01c4c5a5$96202020$8300a8c0@solent
Whole thread Raw
In response to ext3 journalling type  (Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: ext3 journalling type  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-performance
> Am I right to assume that "writeback" is both fastest and at
> the same time as safe to use as ordered?  Maybe any of you
> did some benchmarks?

It should be fastest because it is the least overhead, and safe because
postgres does it's own write-order guaranteeing through fsync().  You should
also mount the FS with the 'noatime' option.

But....  For some workloads, there are tests showing that 'data=journal' can
be the fastest!  This is because although the data is written twice (once to
the journal, and then to its real location on disk) in this mode data is
written _sequentially_ to the journal, and later written out to its
destination, which may be at a quieter time.

There's a discussion (based around 7.2) here:
http://www.kerneltraffic.org/kernel-traffic/kt20020401_160.txt

M


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: ext3 journalling type
Next
From: Mark Wong
Date:
Subject: Re: ext3 journalling type