Re: fsync vs open_sync - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Merlin Moncure
Subject Re: fsync vs open_sync
Date
Msg-id 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3412A749A@Herge.rcsinc.local
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: fsync vs open_sync
List pgsql-performance
> >     There is also the fact that NTFS is a very slow filesystem, and
> > Linux is
> > a lot better than Windows for everything disk, caching and IO related.
> Try
> > to copy some files in NTFS and in ReiserFS...
>
> I'm not so sure I would agree with such a blanket generalization.  I find
> NTFS to be very fast, my main complaint is fragmentation issues...I bet
> NTFS is better than ext3 at most things (I do agree with you about the
> cache, thoughO.

Ok, you were right.  I made some tests and NTFS is just not very good in the general case.  I've seen some benchmarks
forReiser4 that are just amazing. 

Merlin

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Vivek Khera
Date:
Subject: restoring to wrong encoding db
Next
From: Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud
Date:
Subject: Re: fsync vs open_sync