| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Laura Smith <n5d9xq3ti233xiyif2vp(at)protonmail(dot)ch>, postgre <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ZFS filesystem - supported ? |
| Date: | 2021-10-26 20:01:33 |
| Message-ID: | 20211026200133.GC12921@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 07:53:02PM +0200, Chris Travers wrote:
> On the whole ZFS on spinning disks is going to have some performance... rough
> corners..... And it is a lot harder to reason about a lot of things including
> capacity and performance when you are doing copy on write on both the db and FS
> level, and have compression in the picture. And there are other areas of
> complexity, such as how you handle partial page writes.
>
> On the whole I think for small dbs it might perform well enough. On large or
> high velocity dbs I think you will have more problems than expected.
>
> Having worked with PostgreSQL on ZFS I wouldn't generally recommend it as a
> general tool.
I know ZFS has a lot of features/options, and some of those can cause
corruption, so if you modify ZFS options, you need to be sure they don't
affect Postgres reliability.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-10-26 20:17:03 | Re: Determining if a table really changed in a trigger |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-10-26 19:48:39 | Re: [Major version upgrade] pg_upgrade fails despite passing check mode |