Re: Recomended FS

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Ben-Nes Michael <miki(at)canaan(dot)co(dot)il>
Cc: postgresql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Recomended FS
Date: 2003-10-20 22:03:33
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0310202357100.29086-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Ben-Nes Michael writes:

> 1. What is the preferred FS to go with ? EXT3, Reiseref, JFS, XFS ? ( speed,
> efficiency )

PostgreSQL might work better on "simple" file systems, so you avoid making
the head run all over the place for writing its own log and the PostgreSQL
log. Some have even suggested FAT for the data files. Good bets for
improving performance are putting the WAL logs and the indexes not on the
same spindle as the table files. Of course, certain RAID configurations
achieve a similar effect.

> 2. What is the most importent part in the Hardware ? fast HD, alot of mem,
> or maybe strong cpu ?

Lots of memory, so you can cache a large fraction of the data in memory.
A good hard disk, if you do a lot of updates and/or your memory is not big
enough to cache most of the data. CPU is not as important.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Shadovitz 2003-10-20 22:33:38 Re: Procedure for adding a column
Previous Message Gaetano Mendola 2003-10-20 21:14:42 Re: VACUUM degrades performance significantly. Database