| From: | "Steinar H(dot) Gunderson" <sgunderson(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Anything to be gained from a 'Postgres Filesystem'? |
| Date: | 2004-10-21 13:45:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20041021134506.GA1667@uio.no |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 12:44:10PM +0200, Leeuw van der, Tim wrote:
> Hacking PG internally to handle raw devices will meet with strong
> resistance from large portions of the development team. I don't expect
> (m)any core devs of PG will be excited about rewriting the entire I/O
> architecture of PG and duplicating large amounts of OS type of code inside
> the application, just to try to attain an unknown performance benefit.
Well, at least I see people claiming >30% difference between different file
systems, but no, I'm not shouting "bah, you'd better do this or I'll warez
Oracle" :-) I have no idea how much you can improve over the "best"
filesystems out there, but having two layers of journalling (both WAL _and_
FS journalling) on top of each other don't make all that much sense to me.
:-)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Wong | 2004-10-21 13:54:58 | Re: futex results with dbt-3 |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2004-10-21 12:02:00 | Re: Anything to be gained from a 'Postgres Filesystem'? |