| From: | Laszlo Nagy <gandalf(at)shopzeus(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Torsten Zuehlsdorff <foo(at)meisterderspiele(dot)de>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ZFS vs. UFS |
| Date: | 2012-07-24 18:35:49 |
| Message-ID: | 500EEB05.6030005@shopzeus.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> On 24.07.2012 14:51, Laszlo Nagy wrote:
>
>> * UFS is not journaled.
>
> There is journal support for UFS as far as i know. Please have a look
> at the gjournal manpage.
Yes, but gjournal works for disk devices. I would have rely on the hw
card for RAID. When the card goes wrong I won't be able to access my data.
I could also buy an identical RAID card. In fact I could buy a complete
backup server. But right now I don't have the money for that. So I would
like to use a solution that allows me to recover from a failure even if
the RAID card goes wrong.
It might also be possible to combine gmirror + gjournal, but that is not
good enough. Performance and stability of a simple gmirror with two
disks is much worse then a raidz array with 10 disks (and hot spare), or
even a raid 1+0 (and hot spare) that is supported by the hw RAID card.
So I would like to stick with UFS+hw card support (and then I need to
buy an identical RAID card if I can), or ZFS.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Lister | 2012-07-24 18:36:25 | Re: Linux memory zone reclaim |
| Previous Message | Laszlo Nagy | 2012-07-24 18:27:19 | Re: ZFS vs. UFS |