| From: | Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Holger Jakobs <holger(at)jakobs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WAL & ZFS |
| Date: | 2022-03-31 22:58:08 |
| Message-ID: | 61E764EB-0038-4438-83D0-C50036FFB032@elevated-dev.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
> On Mar 31, 2022, at 4:47 PM, Holger Jakobs <holger(at)jakobs(dot)com> wrote:
>
> The WAL is a journal itself and doesn't need another journal for safety. Therefore, a common recommendation is using ext2 (which has no journal) for the WAL partition.
>
> Is this correct?
I could see that being reasonable. In this case I don't control number and size of drives, and have a layout where it's really best in terms of utilization to put them all into the zpool. So my options are limited to ZFS options.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mladen Gogala | 2022-03-31 23:09:24 | Re: WAL & ZFS |
| Previous Message | Holger Jakobs | 2022-03-31 22:47:36 | Re: WAL & ZFS |