Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E28E9F9CE3
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  2 Jan 2007 10:50:33 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 91554-08 for
	<pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  2 Jan 2007 10:50:24 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from mx1.ipf.is (mack.ipf.is [85.197.192.164])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6E909F939F
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  2 Jan 2007 10:50:24 -0400 (AST)
Received: (qmail 14428 invoked by uid 1010); 2 Jan 2007 14:46:24 +0000
Received: from 88.149.106.19 by mack (envelope-from <gnari@hive.is>,
	uid 1008) with qmail-scanner-1.25-st-qms
	(clamdscan: 0.88.4/1639. spamassassin: 3.1.4. perlscan: 1.25-st-qms.
	Clear:RC:1(88.149.106.19):SA:0(-2.4/4.5):.
	Processed in 0.407108 secs); 02 Jan 2007 14:46:24 -0000
X-Antivirus-HIVE-Mail-From: gnari@hive.is via mack
X-Antivirus-HIVE: 1.25-st-qms (Clear:RC:1(88.149.106.19):SA:0(-2.4/4.5):.
	Processed in 0.407108 secs Process 14421)
Received: from dsl-149-106-19.hive.is (HELO ?192.168.1.33?) (88.149.106.19)
	by mx1.ipf.is with SMTP; 2 Jan 2007 14:46:24 +0000
Subject: Re: High update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS
From: Ragnar <gnari@hive.is>
To: Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <459A666E.9090508@3times25.net>
References: <45935A49.6080602@burntmail.com>
	<E1H0HFH-0004cw-6E@elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<20061229220747.GB15429@alvh.no-ip.org> <459A666E.9090508@3times25.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 14:54:56 +0000
Message-Id: <1167749696.6369.413.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200701/12
X-Sequence-Number: 22613

On ūri, 2007-01-02 at 09:04 -0500, Geoffrey wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > 
> > Actually it has been suggested that a combination of ext2 (for WAL) and
> > ext3 (for data, with data journalling disabled) is a good performer.
> > AFAIK you don't want the overhead of journalling for the WAL partition.
> 
> I'm curious as to why ext3 for data with journalling disabled?  Would 
> that not be the same as ext2?

I believe Alvaro was referring to ext3 with journalling enabled 
for meta-data, but not for data.
I also believe this is the standard ext3 configuration, but I
could be wrong on that.

gnari