Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E62632611 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:50:43 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 73265-02 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:50:38 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.186]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42083632568 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:50:37 -0400 (AST) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c7so1474452nfi.23 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:50:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=y5A07Ap0UKKfU57CD1831AnNaITQiA/kBNGrTh3qeKo=; b=Ml6I1iIg4sDlMaEEtoBYxQmq/+ZF3HHjGuAVbwd4zJE/xpgotVUQRXhM1KI3BuFbQF yRkxi+Fk6fkoU/XJXs4mDYBLl8+ab+jIdl/VCuPXBHS0ubeFX3KogzAnQtzzmh7LjCLR zn0PgqSHFZSYza64JkwoQ54tC+cVVeV8fpmWE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=HOUUaVjNZfZCZOBoO6IRm3Cq0LhjWTX/gKgWHmnHuHKZRe580zVefF2+9eZ8QP8Xgw IX0dJ2BaW4NkWYdGwNlDgdjutgGYgms/HoWHVOu4WiI8hbJno7MP1Po/CwgBybrf/B/T NeKtX4T6c1DHE4lJUkW/TEsrIO3BS/8xmMg6U= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.11.5 with SMTP id o5mr1248270mui.75.1232995836458; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:50:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <200901260114.38476@zmi.at> <3786f7bb0901252334oe0f1f90n3e1ea0a539949733@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:50:36 +0100 Message-ID: <3786f7bb0901261050g70a11c4ey49f6438fb9446900@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: postgresql and xfs filesystrem From: Jaume Sabater To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200901/144 X-Sequence-Number: 31191 On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Ezra Taylor wrote: > What about XFS performance on databases larger than 1 TB. We > are successful running postgres on zfs with x4500 but I'm interested using > commodity hardware. To be honest, I have never worked with databases that big :) -- Jaume Sabater http://linuxsilo.net/ "Ubi sapientas ibi libertas"