| From: | Jon Schewe <jpschewe(at)mtu(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2010-06-04 18:26:27 |
| Message-ID: | 4C094553.7040000@mtu.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 6/4/10 9:33 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Friday 04 June 2010 16:25:30 Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>>
>>> On Friday 04 June 2010 14:17:35 Jon Schewe wrote:
>>>
>>>> XFS (logbufs=8): ~4 hours to finish
>>>> ext4: ~1 hour 50 minutes to finish
>>>> ext3: 15 minutes to finish
>>>> ext3 on LVM: 15 minutes to finish
>>>>
>>> My guess is that some of the difference comes from barrier differences.
>>> ext4 uses barriers by default, ext3 does not.
>>>
>> Or, to put it more clearly: the reason ext3 is fast is that it's unsafe.
>>
> Jon: To verify you can enable it via the barrier=1 option during mounting..
>
>
>
First some details:
Linux kernel 2.6.31
postgres version: 8.4.2
More test results:
reiserfs: ~1 hour 50 minutes
ext3 barrier=1: ~15 minutes
ext4 nobarrier: ~15 minutes
jfs: ~15 minutes
--
Jon Schewe | http://mtu.net/~jpschewe
If you see an attachment named signature.asc, this is my digital
signature. See http://www.gnupg.org for more information.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bryan Hinton | 2010-06-04 18:37:15 | Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Jon Schewe | 2010-06-04 18:23:06 | Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL |