Re: What`s wrong with JFS configuration?

From: Paweł Gruszczyński <pawel(dot)gruszczynski(at)inea(dot)com(dot)pl>
To: Alexander Staubo <alex(at)purefiction(dot)net>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: What`s wrong with JFS configuration?
Date: 2007-04-25 13:38:54
Message-ID: 462F59EE.2040801@inea.com.pl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Alexander Staubo napisał(a):
> On 4/25/07, Paweł Gruszczyński <pawel(dot)gruszczynski(at)inea(dot)com(dot)pl> wrote:
>> I have strange situation. I`m testing performance of PostgreSQL database
>> at different filesystems (ext2,ex3,jfs) and I cant say that JFS is as
>> much faster as it is said.
>
> I don't know about 40-60% faster, but JFS is known to be a fast, good
> file system -- faster than other file systems for some things, slower
> for others. It's particularly known for putting a somewhat lower load
> on the CPU than most other journaling file systems.
>
> Alexander.
>
I was just reading some informations on the web (for example:
http://www.nabble.com/a-comparison-of-ext3,-jfs,-and-xfs-on-hardware-raid-t144738.html).

My test should tell mi if it`s true, but now I see that rather everyhing
is ok with my test method and the gain of using JFS is not so high.

Pawel

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Browne 2007-04-25 14:46:28 Re: What`s wrong with JFS configuration?
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2007-04-25 11:21:30 Re: What`s wrong with JFS configuration?