Re: PostgreSQL benchmarked on XFS vs ZFS vs btrfs vs ext4

From: Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>
To: Toby Corkindale <toby(dot)corkindale(at)strategicdata(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL benchmarked on XFS vs ZFS vs btrfs vs ext4
Date: 2011-09-16 14:09:18
Message-ID: CALd+dcdfCWHBHPiC=4JrHMgzwGpx-PhwK1GzHh5gyivJvru+=A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Toby Corkindale
<toby(dot)corkindale(at)strategicdata(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
> However we have a new contender - ZFS performed *extremely* well on the
> latest Ubuntu setup - achieving triple the performance of regular ext4!

Did you do any tuning to ZFS? There are many tweaks to it, like
putting a cache disk in front of it, or moving the logs to SSD and
such. I haven't run any produciton DBs on ZFS yet, but it sure is
tempting. The speed penalty for the features it gives you (snapshots,
robust against power fails, etc.) is worth the tradeoff.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Johnston 2011-09-16 14:10:39 Re: different unnest function
Previous Message Vick Khera 2011-09-16 14:04:33 Re: Noob help for charting on web site, need assistance