Re: Very important choice

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: "Lago, Bruno Almeida do" <extern(dot)Bruno(dot)Lago(at)gedas(dot)com(dot)br>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Very important choice
Date: 2005-02-01 08:50:54
Message-ID: 41FF42EE.1060501@archonet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Lago, Bruno Almeida do wrote:
> Hello my friends,
>
> I'd like to know (based on your experience and technical details) which OS
> is recommended for running PostgreSQL keeping in mind 3 indicators:
>
> 1 - Performance (SO, Network and IO)
> 2 - SO Stability
> 3 - File System Integrity

The short answer is almost certainly whichever OS you are most familiar
with. If you have a problem, you don't want to be learning new details
about your OS while fixing it. That rules out FreeBSD for now.

What hardware you want to use will affect performance and choice of OS.
You'll need to decide what hardware you're looking to use.

As far as file-systems are concerned, ext3 seems to be the slowest, and
the general feeling seems to be that XFS is perhaps the fastest. In
terms of reliability, avoid cutting-edge releases of any file-system -
let others test them for you. One thing to consider is how long it takes
to recover from a crash - you can run PostgreSQL on ext2, but checking a
large disk can take hours after a crash. That's the real benefit of
journalling for PG - speed of recovery.

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PFC 2005-02-01 09:16:47 Re: [SQL] OFFSET impact on Performance???
Previous Message Cosimo Streppone 2005-02-01 06:35:35 Re: High end server and storage for a PostgreSQL OLTP system