Re: Postgresql on file system EXT2 or EXT3

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ben-Nes Michael <miki(at)canaan(dot)co(dot)il>
Cc: Carmen Wai <wai_carmen(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgresql on file system EXT2 or EXT3
Date: 2003-11-28 21:40:18
Message-ID: 200311282140.hASLeIR13568@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Ben-Nes Michael wrote:
> Don't go on EXT2, its not reliable and takes lots of time to start after an
> unclean shutdown. ( all the other explained it quite well )
>
> The most promising FS is Reiserfs v4
> http://www.namesys.com/v4/v4.html
>
> If you cant wait I suggest XFS or JFS.

We have gotten documented reports that JFS is fastest, followed closely
by XFS, and Reiser (fast but consumes more CPU), and finally ext3.

While several folks have trumpeted the fast fsck for these journalling
file systems, their _big_ advantage is robust recovery after a crash,
which ext2 can not guarantee.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-11-28 21:45:52 Re: S.M.A.R.T. hard drives WAS: SCSI vs. IDE performance test
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-11-28 21:32:21 Re: Restore-point?