Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: which ext3 fs type should I use for postgresql

From: Guillaume Cottenceau <gc(at)mnc(dot)ch>
To: "pgsql-performance\(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: which ext3 fs type should I use for postgresql
Date: 2008-05-15 15:56:31
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd 'at'> writes:

> Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>> Matthew Wakeling <matthew 'at'> writes:
>> It is still relevant, as with 5% margin, you can afford changing
>> that to 0% with tune2fs, just the time for you to start PG and
>> remove some data by SQL, then shutdown and set the margin to 5%
>> again.
> I find that if you actually reach that level of capacity failure it is
> due to lack of management and likely there is much lower hanging fruit
> left over by a lazy dba or sysadmin than having to adjust filesystem
> level parameters.
> Manage actively and the above change is absolutely irrelevant.

Of course. I didn't say otherwise. I only say that it's useful in
that case. E.g. if you're using a dedicated partition for PG,
then a good solution is what I describe, rather than horrifyingly
trying to remove some random PG files, or when you cannot
temporarily move some of them and symlink from the PG partition.
I don't praise that kind of case, it should of course be avoided
by sane management. A bad management is not a reason for hiding
solutions to the problems that can happen!

Guillaume Cottenceau

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-05-15 16:19:14
Subject: Re: I/O on select count(*)
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-05-15 15:52:32
Subject: Re: I/O on select count(*)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group