| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Major Linux performance regression; shouldn't we be worried about RHEL6? |
| Date: | 2010-11-05 20:27:06 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinDe5AeHt-aztr5VZFpz=i65tus0NyxmcsJTvFa@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> All,
>
> Domas (of Facebook/Wikipedia, MySQL geek) pointed me to this report:
>
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_perf_regressions&num=1
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ext4_then_now&num=6
>
> The serious problems with this appear to be (a) that Linux/Ext4 PG
> performance still hasn't fully recovered, and, (b) that RHEL6 is set to
> ship with kernel 2.6.32, which means that we'll have a whole generation
> of RHEL which is off-limits to PostgreSQL.
Why would it be off limits? Is it likely to lose data due to power failure etc?
Are you referring to improvements due to write barrier support getting
fixed up fr ext4 to run faster but still be safe? I would assume that
any major patches that increase performance with write barriers
without being dangerous for your data would get back ported by RH as
usual.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-11-05 20:32:44 | Re: Major Linux performance regression; shouldn't we be worried about RHEL6? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-05 20:23:00 | Re: [PERFORM] typoed column name, but postgres didn't grump |