Re: [ADMIN] Raw vs Filesystem

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <el_vigia_ec(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Raw vs Filesystem
Date: 2004-03-30 20:59:13
Message-ID: 4069DFA1.50109@commandprompt.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>
> True, but on the sorts of commodity boxes I use, it doesn't make sense for me
> to waste time setting up non-standard filesystems - it's cheaper to spend a
> little more for better performance. I think SuSE offer Reiser though, so
> maybe we'll see a wider selection available by default.

SuSE defaults to Reiser but also allows XFS. I would suggest XFS.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>

--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL

Attachment Content-Type Size
jd.vcf text/x-vcard 640 bytes

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2004-03-30 21:52:35 Re: [ADMIN] Raw vs Filesystem
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2004-03-30 20:13:12 Re: Nested Sets WAS: column size too large, is this a bug?