| From: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL win32 fragmentation issue |
| Date: | 2006-12-02 16:43:27 |
| Message-ID: | 2463.24.211.165.134.1165077807.squirrel@www.dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> My concern is that this is over a single bench run. I could imagine that
>> after a week or two weeks of stead PostgreSQL use, the IO would
>> gradually get worse and worse.
>
> Well, we mostly do random reads (seek) all the time anyway, so is this
> really a concern?
>
> Are you using NTFS or FAT? You didn't answer that question.
>
If it's FAT then you deserve what you get.
If you really need this, a Slony setup would probably work well. Shut down
replica, defrag, start up replica, wait for sync completion, switchover
and repeat. The new Slony release is said to support Windows.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas H. | 2006-12-02 16:46:43 | Re: PostgreSQL win32 fragmentation issue |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-12-02 16:41:18 | Re: PostgreSQL win32 fragmentation issue |