Re: SCSI vs SATA - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From david@lang.hm
Subject Re: SCSI vs SATA
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.64.0704051308470.26199@asgard.lang.hm
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SCSI vs SATA  ("jason@ohloh.net" <jason@ohloh.net>)
List pgsql-performance
On Thu, 5 Apr 2007, jason@ohloh.net wrote:

>
> I'm curious to know why you're on xfs (i've been too chicken to stray from
> ext3).

better support for large files (although postgres does tend to try and
keep the file size down by going with multiple files) and also for more
files

the multiple levels of indirection that ext3 uses for accessing large
files (or large directories) can really slow things down, just from the
overhead of looking up the metadata (including finding where the actual
data blocks are on disk)

ext4 is planning to address this and will probably be a _very_ good
improvement, but ext3 has very definiate limits that it inherited from
ext2.

David Lang


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: High Load on Postgres 7.4.16 Server
Next
From: david@lang.hm
Date:
Subject: Re: SCSI vs SATA