X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD02B528BB for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:18:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 52210-08 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 13:18:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.194]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5E65287A for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:18:21 -0300 (ADT) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 69so284436wra for ; Fri, 03 Jun 2005 06:18:26 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=VAruUZuOJae9UajrCkzhpG03VARvykhNhXdVS3fkqo3uHFYLy2uzLSXLUdqI3J6Eerh2YGumPAf+U73IMteNZKTviOPFMFzQhxlSOcB3vR2yXvVLwQXVSkzxUSeiopXAAmvmPW7kviur//Pi6pmlpO3YXtQ6z3eIq87EBCGQPNM= Received: by 10.54.13.44 with SMTP id 44mr1115957wrm; Fri, 03 Jun 2005 06:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.86.15 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 06:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <33c6269f050603061824b0cdbf@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 09:18:10 -0400 From: Alex Turner Reply-To: Alex Turner To: Martin Fandel Subject: Re: Filesystem Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <1117782401.4380.37.camel@fandelm.ecommit.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_5480_19158441.1117804690189" References: <1117782401.4380.37.camel@fandelm.ecommit.de> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.354 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, HTML_20_30, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_BY_IP X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200506/69 X-Sequence-Number: 12707 ------=_Part_5480_19158441.1117804690189 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline We have been using XFS for about 6 months now and it has even tolerated a= =20 controller card crash. So far we have mostly good things to report about=20 XFS. I benchmarked raw throughputs at various stripe sizes, and XFS came ou= t=20 on top for us against reiser and ext3. I also used it because of it's=20 supposed good support for large files, which was verified somewhat by the= =20 benchmarks. I have noticed a problem though - if you have 800000 files in a directory,= =20 it seems that XFS chokes on simple operations like 'ls' or 'chmod -R ...'= =20 where ext3 doesn't, don't know about reiser, I went straight back to defaul= t=20 after that problem (that partition is not on a DB server though). Alex Turner netEconomist On 6/3/05, Martin Fandel wrote: >=20 > Hi @ all, >=20 > i have only a little question. Which filesystem is preferred for > postgresql? I'm plan to use xfs (before i used reiserfs). The reason > is the xfs_freeze Tool to make filesystem-snapshots. >=20 > Is the performance better than reiserfs, is it reliable? >=20 > best regards, > Martin >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > ------=_Part_5480_19158441.1117804690189 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline We have been using XFS for about 6 months now and it has even tolerated a controller card crash.  So far we have mostly good things to report about XFS.  I benchmarked raw throughputs at various stripe sizes, and XFS came out on top for us against reiser and ext3.  I also used it because of it's supposed good support for large files, which was verified somewhat by the benchmarks.

I have noticed a problem though - if you have 800000 files in a directory, it seems that XFS chokes on simple operations like 'ls' or 'chmod -R ...' where ext3 doesn't, don't know about reiser, I went straight back to default after that problem (that partition is not on a DB server though).

Alex Turner
netEconomist

On 6/3/05, Martin Fandel <martin.fandel@alphyra-evs.de> wrote: Hi @ all,

i have only a little question. Which filesystem is preferr= ed for
postgresql? I'm plan to use xfs (before i used reiserfs). The rea= son
is the xfs_freeze Tool to make filesystem-snapshots.

Is the p= erformance better than reiserfs, is it reliable?

best regards,
Martin


---------------------------(end = of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading throu= gh Usenet, please send an appropriate
     &nbs= p;subscribe-nomail command to=20 majordomo@postgresql.org so= that your
      message can get through t= o the mailing list cleanly

------=_Part_5480_19158441.1117804690189--