Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [ADMIN] Raw vs Filesystem

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,"Jaime Casanova" <el_vigia_ec(at)hotmail(dot)com>,pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Raw vs Filesystem
Date: 2004-03-30 17:28:59
Message-ID: 200403301828.59498.dev@archonet.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Tuesday 30 March 2004 17:43, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jaime, Richard,
>
> > That's going to depend on a number of things:
> > There are some test results people have provided in the archives, but
> > whether they apply to your setup is open to argument.
>
> True.  On Linux overall, XFS, JFS, and Reiser have all looked good at one
> time or another.   Ext3 has never been a leader for performance, though, so
> that's an easy elimination.

True, but on the sorts of commodity boxes I use, it doesn't make sense for me 
to waste time setting up non-standard filesystems - it's cheaper to spend a 
little more for better performance. I think SuSE offer Reiser though, so 
maybe we'll see a wider selection available by default.

-- 
  Richard Huxton
  Archonet Ltd

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2004-03-30 19:25:40
Subject: select slow?
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-03-30 16:43:01
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Raw vs Filesystem

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group