| From: | "Shridhar Daithankar<shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>" <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: What filesystem? |
| Date: | 2003-02-23 07:01:43 |
| Message-ID: | 200302231231.43240.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Saturday 22 Feb 2003 11:41 pm, you wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-02-22 at 00:25, Joshua Drake wrote:
> > JFS and XFS are the most thoroughly tested. EXT2 is the slowest but
> > very very stable. ReiserFS is good, EXT3 is good as long as you are
> > running 2.4.20 + the source EXT3 patches.
>
> I'd be quite surprised if ext2 was any slower than ext3. Also, since
> most PostgreSQL disk I/O involves large files, I wouldn't think ReiserFS
> would outperform ext2 either.
It does. By quite a large margin. I don't remember exactly but it can be
between 30%-60% on single IDE drive.
Apparently tree indexes in reiser helps it a lot.
Shridhar
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2003-02-23 07:02:10 | Re: GROUPing problem |
| Previous Message | Dennis Gearon | 2003-02-23 05:16:29 | 1 to many relationships |