Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 996F9650191 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 12:01:36 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 98956-10 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 12:01:33 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from smtp114.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com (smtp114.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com [68.142.225.230]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ED887650020 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 12:01:32 -0300 (ADT) Received: (qmail 84950 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2008 15:01:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?99.246.51.72?) (markmielke@rogers.com@99.246.51.72 with plain) by smtp114.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 2008 15:01:31 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: wVUgF2gVM1nbOo49on_Rqc2VWp2RSB9S8ZaIoh4tXGW_W.tWYfeZUZRaI3cMp2WWww-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Message-ID: <48A6EBCB.90100@mark.mielke.cc> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 11:01:31 -0400 From: Mark Mielke User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Smith CC: Bruce Momjian , Mark Wong , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: file system and raid performance References: <200808151922.m7FJMxJ21964@momjian.us> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200808/175 X-Sequence-Number: 31056 Greg Smith wrote: > On Fri, 15 Aug 2008, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> 'data=writeback' is the recommended mount method for that file >> system, though I see that is not mentioned in our official >> documentation. > While writeback has good performance characteristics, I don't know > that I'd go so far as to support making that an official > recommendation. The integrity guarantees of that journaling mode are > pretty weak. Sure the database itself should be fine; it's got the > WAL as a backup if the filesytem loses some recently written bits. > But I'd hate to see somebody switch to that mount option on this > project's recommendation only to find some other files got corrupted > on a power loss because of writeback's limited journalling. ext3 has > plenty of problem already without picking its least safe mode, and > recommending writeback would need a carefully written warning to that > effect. To contrast - not recommending it means that most people unaware will be running with a less effective mode, and they will base their performance measurements on this less effective mode. Perhaps the documentation should only state that "With ext3, data=writeback is the recommended mode for PostgreSQL. PostgreSQL performs its own journalling of data and does not require the additional guarantees provided by the more conservative ext3 modes. However, if the file system is used for any purpose other than PostregSQL database storage, the data integrity requirements of these other purposes must be considered on their own." Personally, I use data=writeback for most purposes, but use data=journal for /mail and /home. In these cases, I find even the default ext3 mode to be fewer guarantees than I am comfortable with. :-) Cheers, mark -- Mark Mielke