From: | Jesper Krogh <jesper(at)krogh(dot)cc> |
---|---|
To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | justin <justin(at)emproshunts(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Benchmark: Dell/Perc 6, 8 disk RAID 10 |
Date: | 2008-03-14 06:17:10 |
Message-ID: | 47DA1866.3050500@krogh.cc |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:09 PM, justin <justin(at)emproshunts(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I chose to use ext3 on these partition
>
> You should really consider another file system. ext3 has two flaws
> that mean I can't really use it properly. A 2TB file system size
> limit (at least on the servers I've tested) and it locks the whole
> file system while deleting large files, which can take several seconds
> and stop ANYTHING from happening during that time. This means that
> dropping or truncating large tables in the middle of the day could
> halt your database for seconds at a time. This one misfeature means
> that ext2/3 are unsuitable for running under a database.
I cannot acknowledge or deny the last one, but the first one is not
true. I have several volumes in the 4TB+ range on ext3 performing nicely.
I can test the "large file stuff", but how large? .. several GB is not a
problem here.
Jesper
--
Jesper
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2008-03-14 06:19:40 | Re: Benchmark: Dell/Perc 6, 8 disk RAID 10 |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2008-03-14 06:12:27 | Re: Benchmark: Dell/Perc 6, 8 disk RAID 10 |