| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lou Picciano <loupicciano(at)comcast(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Craig James <craig_james(at)emolecules(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Best Linux filesystem for Postgres data store ? |
| Date: | 2010-12-01 21:31:36 |
| Message-ID: | 21814.1291239096@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Lou Picciano <loupicciano(at)comcast(dot)net> writes:
> We use ZFS on Solaris for our data stores. Can't beat ZFS for its failsafe features, filesystem portability, etc.
> Having said that, there is that school of thought which would hold that journaling may not be all that indicated anymore, given the quality of recovery possible from the binary logs. In fact, this would suggest that journaling may even be counterproductive - effectively redundant - in a transaction-heavy environment.
Well, the conventional wisdom is that you want metadata journaling, but
*not* data journaling, at the filesystem level. Postgres can protect
its data just fine, but it can't recover if the filesystem goes insane.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dean Gibson (DB Administrator) | 2010-12-02 00:23:03 | 9.0 replication: observation |
| Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2010-12-01 19:07:15 | Re: Best Linux filesystem for Postgres data store ? |