Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0188B2E0059 for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 12:38:42 -0300 (ADT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 03934-05 for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 12:38:36 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from lists.commandprompt.com (host-159.commandprompt.net [207.173.203.159]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EC172E0052 for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 12:38:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.226] (or-69-34-217-90.sta.embarqhsd.net [69.34.217.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by lists.commandprompt.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m4FFdT3j007250 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 15 May 2008 08:39:32 -0700 Message-ID: <482C58EA.5090904@commandprompt.com> Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 08:38:18 -0700 From: "Joshua D. Drake" Organization: Command Prompt, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Guillaume Cottenceau CC: Matthew Wakeling , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: which ext3 fs type should I use for postgresql References: <1210846262.16664.41.camel@philippe-desktop> <482C4F3D.6010808@emolecules.com> <87ve1fwqov.fsf@mnc.ch> <87r6c3wpka.fsf@mnc.ch> In-Reply-To: <87r6c3wpka.fsf@mnc.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (lists.commandprompt.com [207.173.203.159]); Thu, 15 May 2008 08:39:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200805/220 X-Sequence-Number: 30188 Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Matthew Wakeling writes: > It is still relevant, as with 5% margin, you can afford changing > that to 0% with tune2fs, just the time for you to start PG and > remove some data by SQL, then shutdown and set the margin to 5% > again. > I find that if you actually reach that level of capacity failure it is due to lack of management and likely there is much lower hanging fruit left over by a lazy dba or sysadmin than having to adjust filesystem level parameters. Manage actively and the above change is absolutely irrelevant. Joshua D. Drake