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

Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing

From: david(at)lang(dot)hm
To: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing
Date: 2009-03-27 17:30:25
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.1.10.0903271026590.20251@asgard.lang.hm (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Dave Cramer wrote:

> So far using dd I am seeing around 264MB/s on ext3, 335MB/s on ext2 write
> speed. So the question becomes what is the best filesystem for this drive?

until the current mess with ext3 and fsync gets resolved, i would say it 
would probably be a bad choice. I consider ext4 too new, so I would say 
XFS or ext2 (depending on if you need the journal or not)

for the WAL you definantly don't need the journal, for the data I'm not 
sure. I believe that postgres does appropriate fsync calls so is safe on a 
non-journaling filesystem. the fusionIO devices are small enough that a 
fsync on them does not take that long, so it may not be worth the overhead 
of the journaling.

David Lang

> Anyone want me to run anything on it ?
>
> Dave
>

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Matthew WakelingDate: 2009-03-27 17:34:26
Subject: Re: Very specialised query
Previous:From: JeffDate: 2009-03-27 17:23:24
Subject: Re: I have a fusion IO drive available for testing

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