| From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD |
| Date: | 2010-07-26 19:45:13 |
| Message-ID: | 4C4DE5C9.8090004@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Yeb Havinga wrote:
> I did some ext3,ext4,xfs,jfs and also ext2 tests on the just-in-memory
> read/write test. (scale 300) No real winners or losers, though ext2
> isn't really faster and the manual need for fix (y) during boot makes
> it impractical in its standard configuration.
That's what happens every time I try it too. The theoretical benefits
of ext2 for hosting PostgreSQL just don't translate into significant
performance increases on database oriented tests, certainly not ones
that would justify the downside of having fsck issues come back again.
Glad to see that holds true on this hardware too.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.us
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2010-07-26 19:47:14 | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD |
| Previous Message | Yeb Havinga | 2010-07-26 19:43:45 | Re: Testing Sandforce SSD |