Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Testing Sandforce SSD - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Greg Spiegelberg
Subject Re: Testing Sandforce SSD
Date
Msg-id AANLkTimwAqzvWvSfscqDKJDG3Yod=6KQ6e0Xo+c+k6s=@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Testing Sandforce SSD  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Testing Sandforce SSD  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Re: Testing Sandforce SSD  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: Testing Sandforce SSD  (Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>)
List pgsql-performance
Tree view
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Yeb Havinga wrote:
I did some ext3,ext4,xfs,jfs and also ext2 tests on the just-in-memory read/write test. (scale 300) No real winners or losers, though ext2 isn't really faster and the manual need for fix (y) during boot makes it impractical in its standard configuration.

That's what happens every time I try it too.  The theoretical benefits of ext2 for hosting PostgreSQL just don't translate into significant performance increases on database oriented tests, certainly not ones that would justify the downside of having fsck issues come back again.  Glad to see that holds true on this hardware too.


I know I'm talking development now but is there a case for a pg_xlog block device to remove the file system overhead and guaranteeing your data is written sequentially every time?

Greg

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: Testing Sandforce SSD
Next
From: Gerald Fontenay
Date:
Subject: Re: Strange explain on partitioned tables