From: | William Yu <wyu(at)talisys(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: What is WAL used for? |
Date: | 2003-12-01 20:29:45 |
Message-ID: | bqg8bh$1h08$1@news.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Holger Hoffstaette wrote:
> No, you need to take the working of your filesystem into account. As soon
> as data journaling comes into play, it is normal and in fact unavoidable
> that performance drops, because everything is written effectively twice -
> once into the log, once into the file, and to do so the drive has to move.
> WAL with ext3's data journaling is quite unnecessary because the WAL
> sort of IS the database's journal.
Logically seems right but in practice may be untrue. I've found for my
apps, data=journal performs better. When I was picking filesystems, I
did a whole bunch of Googling and there were quite a few people who also
said data=journal performed faster for their Postgres or DB config.
Here's one explanation I found:
"If the database is seeking all over the filesystem and then running
fsync(), then ext3 in data=journal mode can make a huge difference,
because all the dirty data is written out *linearly* to the journal, for
later aysnchronous writeback. This can offer 10x speedups or more."
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-12-01 20:30:32 | Re: I need your help. I'm confused with the files ... |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-12-01 20:29:09 | Re: Equivalent to DBMS_JOB |