Re: JFS fastest filesystem for PostgreSQL?

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: "Jeffrey W(dot) Baker" <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: JFS fastest filesystem for PostgreSQL?
Date: 2005-07-14 18:37:10
Message-ID: 42D6B0D6.6000101@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


>>I ran pgbench with a scale factor of 1000 and a total of 100,000
>>transactions per run. I varied the number of clients between 10 and
>>100. It appears from my test JFS is much faster than both ext3 and XFS
>>for this workload. JFS and XFS were made with the mkfs defaults. ext3
>>was made with -T largefile4 and -E stride=32. The deadline scheduler
>>was used for all runs (anticipatory scheduler is much worse).
>>
>>Here's the result, in transactions per second.
>>
>> ext3 jfs xfs
>>-----------------------------
>> 10 Clients 55 81 68
>>100 Clients 61 100 64
>>----------------------------

I would be curious as to what options were passed to jfs and xfs.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
>
> BTW, it'd be interesting to see how UFS on FreeBSD compared.

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2005-07-14 20:47:02 Re: Quad Opteron stuck in the mud
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-07-14 18:29:48 Re: JFS fastest filesystem for PostgreSQL?