| From: | Ang Chin Han <angch(at)bytecraft(dot)com(dot)my> |
|---|---|
| To: | shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Tuning PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2003-07-21 11:27:54 |
| Message-ID: | 3F1BCE3A.5080402@bytecraft.com.my |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> Good for you. You have time at hand to find out which one suits you best. Do
> the testing before you have load that needs another FS..:-)
Kinda my point is that when we've more load, we'd be using RAID-0 over
RAID-5, or getting faster SCSI drives, or even turn fsync off if that's
a bottleneck, because the different filesystems do not have that much
performance difference[1] -- the filesystem is not a bottleneck. Just
need to tweak most of them a bit, like noatime,data=writeback.
[1] That is, AFAIK, from our testing. Please, please correct me if I'm
wrong: has anyone found that different filesystems produces wildly
different performance for postgresql, FreeBSD's filesystems not included?
--
Linux homer 2.4.18-14 #1 Wed Sep 4 13:35:50 EDT 2002 i686 i686 i386
GNU/Linux
7:00pm up 207 days, 10:05, 5 users, load average: 5.00, 5.03, 5.06
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-07-21 11:39:30 | Re: Tuning PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-07-21 10:31:41 | Re: Tuning PostgreSQL |