Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving. - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Craig James
Subject Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving.
Date
Msg-id 4AF99DC2.9040607@emolecules.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving.  (Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving.  (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>)
Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving.  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-performance
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Given the current quality of Linux code, I hesitate to use anything but ext3
> because I consider that just barely reliable enough even as the most popular
> filesystem by far.  JFS and XFS have some benefits to them, but none so
> compelling to make up for how much less testing they get.  That said, there
> seem to be a fair number of people happily running high-performance
> PostgreSQL instances on XFS.

I thought the common wisdom was to use ext2 for the WAL, since the WAL is a journal system, and ext3 would essentially
bejournaling the journal.  Is that not true? 

Craig

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving.
Next
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving.