Re: ZFS vs. UFS
| От | Craig James |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: ZFS vs. UFS |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFwQ8rcsbTwN6rDQJJbtkWDz-pVmA1bu7=1ewjU-eTLY=LjHOA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: ZFS vs. UFS (Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>) |
| Ответы |
Re: ZFS vs. UFS
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
On 24/07/2012 14:51, Laszlo Nagy wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Under FreeBSD 9, what filesystem should I use for PostgreSQL? (Dell
> PowerEdge 2900, 24G mem, 10x2T SATA2 disk, Intel RAID controller.)
>
> * ZFS is journaled, and it is more independent of the hardware. So if
> the computer goes wrong, I can move the zfs array to a different server.
> * UFS is not journaled. Also I have to rely on the RAID card to build
> the RAID array. If there is a hw problem with it, then I won't be
> able to recover the data easily.
>
> I wonder if UFS has better performance or not. Or can you suggest
> another fs? Just of the PGDATA directory.
Relying on physically moving a disk isn't a good backup/recovery strategy. Disks are the least reliable single component in a modern computer. You should figure out the best file system for your application, and separately figure out a recovery strategy, one that can survive the failure of *any* component in your system, including the disk itself.
Craig
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: