Re: XFS filessystem for Datawarehousing -2

From: Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: XFS filessystem for Datawarehousing -2
Date: 2006-08-03 21:00:04
Message-ID: 60hd0tilgr.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

denisl(at)enterprisedb(dot)com ("Denis Lussier") writes:
> I have no personal experience with XFS, but, I've seen numerous
> internal edb-postgres test results that show that of all file
> systems... OCFS 2.0 seems to be quite good for PG update intensive
> apps (especially on 64 bit machines).

I have been curious about OCFS for some time; it sounded like a case
where there could possibly be some useful semantic changes to
filesystem functionality, notably that:

- atime is pretty irrelevant;
- it might try to work with pretty fixed block sizes (8K, perhaps?)
rather than try to be efficient at handling tiny files

It sounds like it ought to be able to be a good fit.

Of course, with a big warning sticker of "what is required for Oracle
to work properly is implemented, anything more is not a guarantee" on
it, who's going to trust it?
--
select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'cbbrowne.com';
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/oses.html
"There isn't any reason why Linux can't be implemented as an
enterprise computing solution. Find out what you've been missing
while you've been rebooting Windows NT." - Infoworld

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message hansell baran 2006-08-03 23:39:39 slow transfer speeds with PostgreSQL
Previous Message Ian Westmacott 2006-08-03 20:55:37 Re: