From: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | "Alex J(dot) Avriette" <alex(at)posixnap(dot)net> |
Cc: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Tablespaces |
Date: | 2004-02-26 21:22:25 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0402270817040.20164@linuxworld.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 |
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Alex J. Avriette wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 11:22:28PM +1100, Gavin Sherry wrote:
>
> > Certainly, table spaces are used in many ways in oracle, db2, etc. You can
> > mirror data across them, have different buffer sizes for example.
> > In some implementations, they can be raw disk partitions (no file system).
> > I don't intend going this far, however.
>
> Perhaps now would be a good time to bring up my directio on Solaris question
> from a year or so back? Is there any interest in the ability to use raw
> disk?
I do not intend to undertake raw disk tablespaces for 7.5. I'd be
interested if anyone could provide some real world benchmarking of file
system vs. raw disk. Postgres benefits a lot from kernel file system cache
at the moment. Also, I believe that database designers have traditionally
made bad file system designers. Raw database partitions often lack the
tools essential to a scalable environment. For example, the ability to
resize partitions.
Gavin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2004-02-26 21:30:28 | Re: Tablespaces |
Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2004-02-26 21:04:09 | Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2004-02-26 21:30:28 | Re: Tablespaces |
Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2004-02-26 21:04:09 | Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal |