| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ian Westmacott <ianw(at)intellivid(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: VACUUM and read-mostly tables |
| Date: | 2005-04-05 19:35:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20050405193508.GW93835@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 01:56:05PM -0400, Ian Westmacott wrote:
> > And if UFS is available for linux you should might try it.
>
> Would UFS help the fragmentation issue? We have seen ext3
> allocating blocks in 2-4 pages, while XFS manages 8-16
> pages.
Actually, I spoke too soon in my last reply. UFS has done work to be
more intelligent about where it allocates space from, so it's very
possible that even if it's only allocating a block at a time that it
will be smart enough not to allocate nearby space for other things. I
believe there's also some tuning parameters that affect that behavior.
Of course, other linux filesystems might be tunable in that regard as
well.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ian FREISLICH | 2005-04-06 05:54:03 | Preventing the schema from being revealed. |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-04-05 19:32:03 | Re: VACUUM and read-mostly tables |