| From: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [seanc@FreeBSD.org: Re: Performance tests I did with |
| Date: | 2003-08-29 02:48:17 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.4.51.0308291145270.1359@angelic-vtfw.cvpn.cynic.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Sean Chittenden wrote:
> FreeBSD uses 16K blocks for its FS...
Actually, FreeBSD can use 8K blocks as well. The reason for using 16K
blocks is not speeed, but to reduce filesystem overhead and, more
importantly, to allow larger cylinder groups. But for a database with
a lot of random access of small records, your caching will probably
do better if you use 8K filesystem blocks; you're like to be able to
effectively cache more data.
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.NetBSD.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2003-08-29 03:06:59 | Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2003-08-29 02:35:47 | Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... |