Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL
От | Jon Schewe |
---|---|
Тема | Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4C094982.4040203@mtu.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: How filesystems matter with PostgreSQL (Bryan Hinton <bryan@bryanhinton.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
I just used standard mkfs for each filesystem and mounted them without options, unless otherwise specified.
On 6/4/10 1:37 PM, Bryan Hinton wrote:
On 6/4/10 1:37 PM, Bryan Hinton wrote:
What types of journaling on each fs?On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Jon Schewe <jpschewe@mtu.net> wrote:On 6/4/10 9:33 AM, Andres Freund wrote:First some details:
> On Friday 04 June 2010 16:25:30 Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>>
>>> On Friday 04 June 2010 14:17:35 Jon Schewe wrote:
>>>
>>>> XFS (logbufs=8): ~4 hours to finish
>>>> ext4: ~1 hour 50 minutes to finish
>>>> ext3: 15 minutes to finish
>>>> ext3 on LVM: 15 minutes to finish
>>>>
>>> My guess is that some of the difference comes from barrier differences.
>>> ext4 uses barriers by default, ext3 does not.
>>>
>> Or, to put it more clearly: the reason ext3 is fast is that it's unsafe.
>>
> Jon: To verify you can enable it via the barrier=1 option during mounting..
>
>
>
Linux kernel 2.6.31
postgres version: 8.4.2
More test results:
reiserfs: ~1 hour 50 minutes
ext3 barrier=1: ~15 minutes
ext4 nobarrier: ~15 minutes
jfs: ~15 minutes
--
Jon Schewe | http://mtu.net/~jpschewe
If you see an attachment named signature.asc, this is my digital
signature. See http://www.gnupg.org for more information.
--Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
-- Jon Schewe | http://mtu.net/~jpschewe If you see an attachment named signature.asc, this is my digital signature. See http://www.gnupg.org for more information.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: