Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jon Schewe
Subject Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL
Date
Msg-id 4C09448A.9040700@mtu.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL  (Bryan Hinton <bryan@bryanhinton.com>)
List pgsql-performance
I'm running on Linux, so that's not really an option here.

On 6/4/10 1:20 PM, Bryan Hinton wrote:
UFS2 w/ soft updates on FreeBSD might be an interesting addition to the list of test cases

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
On Friday 04 June 2010 16:25:30 Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > On Friday 04 June 2010 14:17:35 Jon Schewe wrote:
> >> XFS (logbufs=8): ~4 hours to finish
> >> ext4: ~1 hour 50 minutes to finish
> >> ext3: 15 minutes to finish
> >> ext3 on LVM: 15 minutes to finish
> >
> > My guess is that some of the difference comes from barrier differences.
> > ext4 uses barriers by default, ext3 does not.
> Or, to put it more clearly: the reason ext3 is fast is that it's unsafe.
Jon: To verify you can enable it via the barrier=1 option during mounting..

Andres

--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance


-- 
Jon Schewe | http://mtu.net/~jpschewe
If you see an attachment named signature.asc, this is my digital
signature. See http://www.gnupg.org for more information.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Anj Adu
Date:
Subject: Re: slow query
Next
From: Jon Schewe
Date:
Subject: Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL