Re: ZFS vs. UFS

From: Laszlo Nagy <gandalf(at)shopzeus(dot)com>
To: Craig James <cjames(at)emolecules(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ZFS vs. UFS
Date: 2012-07-24 18:27:19
Message-ID: 500EE907.1040801@shopzeus.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


> > I wonder if UFS has better performance or not. Or can you suggest
> > another fs? Just of the PGDATA directory.
>
>
> Relying on physically moving a disk isn't a good backup/recovery
> strategy. Disks are the least reliable single component in a modern
> computer. You should figure out the best file system for your
> application, and separately figure out a recovery strategy, one that
> can survive the failure of *any* component in your system, including
> the disk itself.
This is why I use a RAID array of 10 disks. So there is no single point
of failure. What else could I do? (Yes, I can make regular backups, but
that is not the same. I can still loose data...)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laszlo Nagy 2012-07-24 18:35:49 Re: ZFS vs. UFS
Previous Message Richard Huxton 2012-07-24 17:21:38 Re: transactions start time