From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Daniel Åkerud <zilch(at)home(dot)se>, Jason Earl <jdearl(at)yahoo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Harddisk performance degrading over time? |
Date: | 2001-06-24 22:29:29 |
Message-ID: | 200106242229.f5OMTT306365@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > Oh yeah,
> > > vacuuming is not the problem here.
> > >
> > > Thanks anyway... :)
> > >
> > > And also, it seems that it is the indexed searches that is suffering the
> > > most. The non-indexed searches is less affected. This is not only PostgreSQL
> > > but also MySQL.
> >
> > I know the BSD filesystems are self-defragmenting. I don't know if the
> > ext2 filesystems are the same. Surely someone must know.
> Not exactly, BSD ffs (fast filesystem) isn't self-defragmenting, it just
> fragments differently [less than] ext2 :)
Yes, BSD is more "doesn't fragment much" rather than "self
defragmenting".
> See this for paper and some tools to get ffs fragmentation stats:
> http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~margo/usenix.195
> (it has links to critique of the paper as well)
>
> There's a tool ftp://ftp.uk.linux.org/pub/linux/sct/defrag/ to defrag ext2
> filesystem, but its considered to be alpha quality and not really
> maintained.
Yes, thanks for the clarification.
--
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 | Alex Pilosov | 2001-06-24 22:33:51 | Re: Harddisk performance degrading over time? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-06-24 20:57:25 | Re: Harddisk performance degrading over time? |