Subject: Re: RES: RES: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI
From: Mark Lewis <mark.lewis@mir3.com>
To: carlosreimer@terra.com.br
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <PEEPKDFEHHEMKBBFPOOKMEHHCPAA.carlosreimer@terra.com.br>
References: <PEEPKDFEHHEMKBBFPOOKMEHHCPAA.carlosreimer@terra.com.br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Organization: MIR3, Inc.
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 13:44:04 -0700
Message-Id: <1149281044.20798.116.camel@archimedes>
Mime-Version: 1.0

On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 17:37 -0300, carlosreimer@terra.com.br wrote:
> Many thanks Mark,
>=20
> I will consider fsync=3Doff only to do an initial load, not for a databas=
e normal operation.
>=20

This approach works well.  You just need to remember to shut down the
database and start it back up again with fsync enabled for it to be safe
after the initial load.

> I was just thinking about this hipotetical scenario:=20
> a) a restore database operation
> b) fsync off
> c) write-back on (IDE)
>=20
> As I could understand, in this sceneraio, it=C2=B4s normal the IDE drive =
be faster than the SCSI, ok?
>=20

If fsync is off, then the IDE drive loses its big advantage, so IDE and
SCSI should be about the same speed.

> Of course, the database is exposed because of the fsync=3Doff, but if you=
 consider only the system performance, then it is true. Isn=C2=B4t it?


> Thanks,
>=20
> Reimer
>=20
>=20