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

Re: which ext3 fs type should I use for postgresql

From: Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>
To: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: which ext3 fs type should I use for postgresql
Date: 2008-05-15 12:23:57
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0805151320140.16756@aragorn.flymine.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Thu, 15 May 2008, david(at)lang(dot)hm wrote:
> IIRC postgres likes to do 1M/file, which isn't very largeas far as the -T 
> setting goes.

ITYF it's actually 1GB/file.

> think twice about this. ext2/3 get slow when they fill up (they have 
> fragmentation problems when free space gets too small), this 5% that only 
> root can use also serves as a buffer against that as well.

It makes sense to me that the usage pattern of Postgres would be much less 
susceptible to causing fragmentation than normal filesystem usage. Has 
anyone actually tested this and found out?

Matthew

-- 
Isn't "Microsoft Works" something of a contradiction?

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Matthew WakelingDate: 2008-05-15 12:37:34
Subject: Re: I/O on select count(*)
Previous:From: davidDate: 2008-05-15 12:20:09
Subject: Re: which ext3 fs type should I use for postgresql

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