On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 08:02:17AM -0400, mlw wrote:
> The way I understand it is that ReiserFS does not attempt to separate files at
> the block level. Multiple files can live in the same disk block. This is cool
> if you have many small files, but the extra overhead for large files such as
> those used by a database, is a bit much.
It should be at least as fast as other filesystems for large files. I suspect
that it would be faster in fact. The only catch is that the performance of
reiserfs sucks when it gets past 85% or so full. (ext2 has similar problems)
You can read about all this stuff at http://www.namesys.com/
> I really think a simple low down dirty file system is just what the doctor
> ordered for postgres.
Traditional BSD FFS or Solaris UFS is probably the best bet for postgres.
> Remember, general purpose file systems must do for files what Postgres is
> already doing for records. You will always have extra work. I am seriously
> thinking of trying a FAT32 as pg_xlog. I wonder if it will improve performance,
> or if there is just something fundamentally stupid about FAT32 that will make
> it worse?
Well, for a starters, file permissions...
Ext2 would kick arse over FAT32 for performance.
--
Michael Samuel <michael@miknet.net>
