Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Dan Gorman
Subject Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp
Date
Msg-id 6A9B730A-425A-456E-9913-031B652E6227@hi5.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp  ("Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp  ("Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>)
Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
List pgsql-performance
That makes sense. Speaking of NetApp, we're using the 3050C with 4 FC
shelfs. Any generic advice other than the NetApp (their NFS oracle
tuning options)
that might be useful? (e.g. turning off snapshots)

Regards,
Dan Gorman

On Jun 14, 2006, at 10:14 PM, Jonah H. Harris wrote:

> On 14 Jun 2006 23:33:53 -0400, Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> wrote:
>> In fact the benefit of the NVRAM is precisely that it makes sure
>> you *don't*
>> have any reason to turn fsync off. It should make the fsync
>> essentially free.
>
> Having run PostgreSQL on a NetApp with input from NetApp, this is
> correct.  fsync should be turned on, but you will not incur the *real*
> direct-to-disk cost of the sync, it will be direct-to-NVRAM.
>
> --
> Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
> EnterpriseDB Corporation            | fax: 732.331.1301
> 33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor            | jharris@enterprisedb.com
> Iselin, New Jersey 08830            | http://www.enterprisedb.com/



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Jonah H. Harris"
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp
Next
From: "Jonah H. Harris"
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres fsync off (not needed) with NetApp