Re: [ADMIN] Raw devices vs. Filesystems
От | Grega Bremec |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [ADMIN] Raw devices vs. Filesystems |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20040408043304.GA28539@elbereth.noviforum.si обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [ADMIN] Raw devices vs. Filesystems (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [ADMIN] Raw devices vs. Filesystems
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
...and on Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 09:09:16AM -0700, Josh Berkus used the keyboard: > > Does it work, though? Without Oracle admin tools? Hello, Josh. :) Well, as I said, that's why I was asking - I'm willing to give it a go if nobody can prove me wrong. :) > > Now, if both goals can be achieved in one go, hell, I'm willing to try > > it out myself in an attempt to extract off of it, some performance > > indicators that could be compared to other database performance tests > > sent to both this and the PERFORM mailing list. > > Hey, any test you wanna run is fine with us. I'm pretty sure that OCFS > belongs to Oracle, though, patent & copyright, so we couldn't actually use it > in practice. I thought you knew - OCFS, OCFS-Tools and OCFSv2 have not only been open- source for quite a while now - they're released under the GPL. http://oss.oracle.com/projects/ocfs/ http://oss.oracle.com/projects/ocfs-tools/ http://oss.oracle.com/projects/ocfs2/ I don't know what that means to you (probably nothing good, as PostgreSQL is released under the BSD license), but it most definitely can be considered a good thing for the end user, as she can download it, compile, and set it up on her disks, without the need to pay Oracle royalties. :) > If your intention in this test is to show the superiority of raw devices, let > me give you a reality check: barring some major corporate backing getting > involved, we can't possibly implement our own PG-FS for database support. We > already have a TODO list which is far too long for our developer pool, and > implementing a custom FS either takes a large team (OCFS) or several years of > development (Reiser). Not really - I was just thinking about something not-entirely-a-filesystem and POK!, OCFS sprang to mind. It omits many POSIX features that slow down a traditional filesystem, yet it does know the concept of inodes and most of all, it's _really_ heavy on caching. As such, it sounded quite promising to me, but trial, I think, is the best test. The question does spring up though, that Steve raised in another post - just for the record, what POSIX semantics can a postmaster live without in a filesystem? Cheers, -- Grega Bremec Senior Administrator Noviforum Ltd., Software & Media http://www.noviforum.si/
Вложения
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: