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

Re: postgresql and xfs filesystrem

From: Andre Majorel <aym-2lqsgp(at)teaser(dot)fr>
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: postgresql and xfs filesystrem
Date: 2009-01-25 23:42:03
Message-ID: 20090125234203.GC3437@aym.net2.nerim.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
On 2009-01-25 14:06 -0500, Christopher Browne wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Ezra Taylor <ezra(dot)taylor(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Do any of you have gripes about using XFS with the latest version of
> > postgres?
> 
> I'd not expect there to be much specific benefit to it...
> 
> I did some benchmarking, now quite a while ago, which showed XFS to
> be, for a totally write-bound workload, a *few* percent better than
> ext3/JFS, but note that this is only a minor difference.
> 
> The fact that XFS isn't one of the "more highly supported" filesystems
> on Linux is something I'd consider a *way* more important factor.
> 
> When balancing "oh, maybe a tiny percentage faster" against "oh,
> nobody will be in a position to offer much support if anything goes
> wrong," I'll take "easier to support" any day.

In 2007, there was some noise about XFS being much less tolerant
of crashes and loss of power than the other Linux journalling file
systems. Dunno if that was fixed.

-- 
André Majorel <URL:http://www.teaser.fr/~amajorel/>

In response to

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Michael MonnerieDate: 2009-01-26 00:14:30
Subject: Re: postgresql and xfs filesystrem
Previous:From: Christopher BrowneDate: 2009-01-25 19:06:17
Subject: Re: postgresql and xfs filesystrem

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