Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B808E1337BCC for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 14:05:48 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 50468-01-2 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 18:05:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:06:49.374086 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com (mail-fx0-f46.google.com [209.85.161.46]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F9771337B77 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 14:05:37 -0400 (AST) Received: by fxm20 with SMTP id 20so319130fxm.19 for ; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:05:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.74.11 with SMTP id s11mr601953faj.2.1291226326729; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:58:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from Craig-Jamess-MacBook-Pro.local (wsip-70-167-124-126.sd.sd.cox.net [70.167.124.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a10sm116862fai.28.2010.12.01.09.58.44 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:58:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4CF68CD2.2040707@emolecules.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:58:42 -0800 From: Craig James User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Best Linux filesystem for Postgres data store ? References: <4CF61B430200002500038009@gw.wicourts.gov> In-Reply-To: <4CF61B430200002500038009@gw.wicourts.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201012/6 X-Sequence-Number: 36235 On 12/1/10 7:54 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > "Lello, Nick" wrote: > >> What is considered the best filesystem to use for postgres data >> stores ? > > I held off for a bit to see if someone else would jump in with a > comparison of filesystems, but so far nobody has taken the bait. > The reason I held off is that the only reasonable answer I can think > of is, "It depends." > > Personally, I would stay away from any filesystem without journaling > for allocations; which, for example, leaves out ext2. For various > reasons I would also avoid ReiserFS. We've had good luck with xfs > in our shop. We used xfs with good results for a couple years. We recently reinstalled the latest Linux and Postgres on the same hardware, and our tests showed ext4 gave slightly better performance than xfs so we switched to ext4. This is on a BBU 8-disk RAID10 array with 10K SATA disks. Just one data point... Craig