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

Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics

From: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com>
Cc: "<david(at)lang(dot)hm>" <david(at)lang(dot)hm>, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com>, Pgsql performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics
Date: 2010-03-09 07:00:50
Message-ID: 4B95F222.6040504@2ndquadrant.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Scott Carey wrote:
> For high sequential throughput, nothing is as optimized as XFS on Linux yet.  It has weaknesses elsewhere however.
>   

I'm curious what you feel those weaknesses are.  The recent addition of 
XFS back into a more mainstream position in the RHEL kernel as of their 
5.4 update greatly expands where I can use it now, have been heavily 
revisiting it since that release.  I've already noted how well it does 
on sequential read/write tasks relative to ext3, and it looks like the 
main downsides I used to worry about with it (mainly crash recovery 
issues) were also squashed in recent years.

-- 
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com   www.2ndQuadrant.us


In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Vidhya BondreDate: 2010-03-09 09:38:53
Subject: Out of shared memory in postgres 8.4.2 and locks
Previous:From: Scott CareyDate: 2010-03-09 00:01:21
Subject: Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics

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