From: | Markus Schaber <schabios(at)logi-track(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | |
Cc: | <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Anything to be gained from a 'Postgres Filesystem'? |
Date: | 2004-11-04 11:00:47 |
Message-ID: | 20041104120047.62810c8f@kingfisher.intern.logi-track.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi, Leeuw,
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:44:10 +0200
"Leeuw van der, Tim" <tim(dot)leeuwvander(at)nl(dot)unisys(dot)com> wrote:
> (I'm not sure if it's a good idea to create a PG-specific FS in your
> OS of choice, but it's certainly gonna be easier than getting FS code
> inside of PG)
I don't think PG really needs a specific FS. I rather think that PG
could profit from some functionality that's missing in traditional UN*X
file systems.
posix_fadvise(2) may be a candidate. Read/Write bareers another pone, as
well asn syncing a bunch of data in different files with a single call
(so that the OS can determine the best write order). I can also imagine
some interaction with the FS journalling system (to avoid duplicate
efforts).
We should create a list of those needs, and then communicate those to
the kernel/fs developers. Then we (as well as other apps) can make use
of those features where they are available, and use the old way
everywhere else.
Maybe Reiser4 is a step into the right way, and maybe even a postgres
plugin for Reiser4 will be worth the effort. Maybe XFS/JFS etc. already
have such capabilities. Maybe that's completely wrong.
cheers,
Markus
--
markus schaber | dipl. informatiker
logi-track ag | rennweg 14-16 | ch 8001 zürich
phone +41-43-888 62 52 | fax +41-43-888 62 53
mailto:schabios(at)logi-track(dot)com | www.logi-track.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2004-11-04 12:19:00 | Re: Restricting Postgres |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-11-04 08:32:08 | Re: index not used if using IN or OR |