Re: PostgreSQL Reliability when fsync = false on Linux-XFS - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Sean Chittenden
Subject Re: PostgreSQL Reliability when fsync = false on Linux-XFS
Date
Msg-id 20030904072735.GB75041@perrin.nxad.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL Reliability when fsync = false on Linux-XFS  ("Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL Reliability when fsync = false on Linux-XFS  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-performance
> Just wonderin. What if you symlink WAL to a directory which is on
> mounted USB RAM drive?

USB 2.0 you mean?  It supposedly runs at 1394 speeds, but USB 1.0/1.1
runs at 1MB/s under ideal circumstances... that's slower than even old
IDE drives.

> Will that increase any throughput?

Probably not...

> I am sure a 256/512MB flash drive will cost lot less than a SCSI
> disk. May be even a GB on flash drive would do..

That's true... but on a per $$/MB, you're better off investing in RAM
and increasing your effective_cache_size.  If dd to a flash card is
faster than to an IDE drive, please let me know.  :) -sc

--
Sean Chittenden
UNIX(TM), a BSD like Operating System

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Shridhar Daithankar"
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Reliability when fsync = false on Linux-XFS
Next
From: "Relaxin"
Date:
Subject: Re: SELECT's take a long time compared to other DBMS