From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: Jeffrey W. Baker <jwbaker@acm.org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:16:15 -0700
Message-ID: <200510031416.15620.josh@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1128372151.28509.1.camel@toonses.gghcwest.com>
References: <31833713.1128111650174.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
<200510031334.02030.josh@agliodbs.com>
<1128372151.28509.1.camel@toonses.gghcwest.com>
Jeff,
> > Nope, LOTS of testing, at OSDL, GreenPlum and Sun. For comparison, A
> > Big-Name Proprietary Database doesn't get much more than that either.
>
> I find this claim very suspicious. I get single-threaded reads in
> excess of 1GB/sec with XFS and > 250MB/sec with ext3.
Database reads? Or raw FS reads? It's not the same thing.
Also, we're talking *write speed* here, not read speed.
I also find *your* claim suspicious, since there's no way XFS is 300% faster
than ext3 for the *general* case.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: josh@agliodbs.com, jwbaker@acm.org, mstone+postgres@mathom.us
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort?
In-Reply-To: <200510031416.15620.josh@agliodbs.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox