From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: New Linux xfs/reiser file systems |
Date: | 2001-05-02 21:36:45 |
Message-ID: | 200105022136.f42Lajl01886@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> The "problem" with log based filesystems is that they most likely
> do not know the consequences of a write so an fsync on a file may
> require double writing to both the log and the "real" portion of
> the disk. They can also exhibit the problem that an fsync may
> cause all pending writes to require scheduling unless the log is
> constructed on the fly rather than incrementally.
Yes, this double-writing is a problem. Suppose you have your WAL on a
separate drive. You can fsync() WAL with zero head movement. With a
log based file system, you need two head movements, so you have gone
from zero movements to two.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-05-02 21:38:03 | Collation order for btree-indexable datatypes |
Previous Message | Alfred Perlstein | 2001-05-02 21:28:07 | Re: New Linux xfs/reiser file systems |