Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 915912E0222 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:42:02 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 63556-10 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:41:35 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from vms044pub.verizon.net (vms044pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.44]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B6B2E0223 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:41:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([72.83.241.121]) by vms044.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JXX00MNLARCXZN6@vms044.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 06:04:26 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2D070A3F; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:04:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (osgiliath.home.mathom.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id D4IyGMARLyhH; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:04:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 22008715DC; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:04:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:04:21 -0400 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: Benchmark: Dell/Perc 6, 8 disk RAID 10 In-reply-to: <47DD6F4C.2050208@emolecules.com> To: Craig James Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-followup-to: Craig James , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20080318110419.GG2626@mathom.us> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mathom.us X-Pgp-Fingerprint: 53 FF 38 00 E7 DD 0A 9C 84 52 84 C5 EE DF 7C 88 References: <016301c8854e$851e06e0$3101a8c0@JDell> <47DA1866.3050500@krogh.cc> <47DA37E1.6050104@emproshunts.com> <47DA5852.30004@emproshunts.com> <47DCBBF9.1090401@emproshunts.com> <47DD6F4C.2050208@emolecules.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200803/371 X-Sequence-Number: 29325 On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 12:04:44PM -0700, Craig James wrote: >Just out of curiosity: Last time I did research, the word seemed to be that >xfs was better than ext2 or ext3. Is that not true? Why use ext2/3 at all >if xfs is faster for Postgres? For the WAL, the filesystem is largely irrelevant. (It's relatively small, the files are preallocated, the data is synced to disk so there's not advantage from write buffering, etc.) The best filesystem is one that does almost nothing and stays out of the way--ext2 is a good choice for that. The data is a different story and a different filesystem is usually a better choice. (If for no other reason than to avoid long fsck times.) Mike Stone