Re: File system performance and pg_xlog

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=)
Cc: Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>, Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: File system performance and pg_xlog
Date: 2001-05-07 16:08:37
Message-ID: 21723.989251717@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=) writes:
> If you're using raw devices on Linux and get a win there, it's a win
> for Postgresql on Linux. ...
> It all comes down to if it actually would give a performance boost,
> how much work it is and if someone wants to do it.

No, those are not the only considerations. If the feature is not
portable then we also have to consider how much of a headache it'll be
to maintain in parallel with a more portable approach. We might reject
such a feature even if it's a clear win for Linux, if it creates enough
problems elsewhere. Postgres is *not* a Linux-only application, and I
trust it never will be.

regards, tom lane

PS: that's not meant to reject the idea out-of-hand; perhaps the
benefits will prove to be so large that we will want to do it
anyway. I'm just trying to counter what appears to be a narrowly
platform-centric view of the issues.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-05-07 16:09:41 Re: File system performance and pg_xlog
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2001-05-07 16:07:56 Re: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole?