| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | HSIEN-WEN CHU <hsienwen(dot)chu(at)googlemail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: VX_CONCURRENT flag on vxfs( 5.1 or later) for performance for postgresql? |
| Date: | 2011-04-28 13:25:33 |
| Message-ID: | 25785.1303997133@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-novice pgsql-performance |
HSIEN-WEN CHU <hsienwen(dot)chu(at)googlemail(dot)com> writes:
> When database files are on a VxFS filesystem, performance can be
> significantly improved by setting the VX_CONCURRENT cache advisory on
> the file according to vxfs document,
Presumably, if whatever behavior this invokes were an unalloyed good,
they'd have just made it the default. The existence of a flag makes
me suppose that there are some clear application-visible downsides.
What are they?
BTW, please do not cross-post the same question to three different lists.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shiv | 2011-04-28 13:34:32 | Re: improvements to pgtune |
| Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2011-04-28 13:21:16 | Re: Extension Packaging |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-04-28 13:28:58 | Re: failure and silence of SQL commands |
| Previous Message | Francisco Leovey | 2011-04-28 13:14:45 | PgAdmin no longer works on a "clean install" XP SP2 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2011-04-28 15:56:10 | Re: reducing random_page_cost from 4 to 2 to force index scan |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-04-28 12:33:06 | Re: Order of tables |