Re: good pc but bad performance,why?
От | Shridhar Daithankar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: good pc but bad performance,why? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200404071724.41860.shridhar@frodo.hserus.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: good pc but bad performance,why? (huang yaqin <hyq@gthome.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Sending again bacuse of MUA error.. Chose a wrong address in From..:-( Shridhar On Wednesday 07 April 2004 17:21, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: > On Wednesday 07 April 2004 16:59, Andrew McMillan wrote: > > One thing I recommend is to use ext2 (or almost anything but ext3). > > There is no real need (or benefit) from having the database on a > > journalled filesystem - the journalling is only trying to give similar > > sorts of guarantees to what the fsync in PostgreSQL is doing. > > That is not correct assumption. A journalling file system ensures file > system consistency even at a cost of loss of some data. And postgresql can > not guarantee recovery if WAL logs are corrupt. Some months back, there was > a case reported where ext2 corrupted WAL and database. BAckup is only > solution then.. > > Journalling file systems are usually very close to ext2 in performance, > many a times lot better. With ext2, you are buying a huge risk. > > Unless there are good reason, I would not put a database on ext2. > Performance isn't one ofthem.. > > Shridhar
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: