Received: from localhost (maia-4.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93FF89FB915 for ; Tue, 8 May 2007 06:43:23 -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 48500-01 for ; Tue, 8 May 2007 06:43:20 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.178]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CC5E9FB8DA for ; Tue, 8 May 2007 06:43:20 -0300 (ADT) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id a73so1478594pye for ; Tue, 08 May 2007 02:43:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=Klebtz13fzMtGXL/hPHqbpgmM5O9kQmfuUpH3QJwtPkNPwEs89fYNkSF0rB6Mwznuri0TItZfpB7msPQDHFLe5w2rXFYa55Qw4CFljDZcKg5//V39R9UbqU/gKLGDOeTdMT73r1it37SbMam1fGxH9aqS5duxOy1OenN2b2BuJ0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=rGuGrAd4IwTJIFzfEB+5jGcTrhkyWnom6MMZFYqXLSsCI6R5qQTm8yRoNg1mBSs8oK7BPb8oxjouZpsohKtmrOZPwV0SIXk6pgSI787zye5rVPvpnRiJlrnm3GiGE1SuV55548Ar8CVJce7Ma3aaRimVLrvwRUOQknwshBDSs0A= Received: by 10.65.191.7 with SMTP id t7mr11756281qbp.1178617398992; Tue, 08 May 2007 02:43:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.65.240.15 with HTTP; Tue, 8 May 2007 02:43:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <88daf38c0705080243l71edd04ev219208f2a6e6c8b7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 11:43:18 +0200 From: "Alexander Staubo" To: "david@lang.hm" Subject: Re: Best OS for Postgres 8.2 Cc: "=?UTF-8?Q?=E6=9D=8E=E5=BD=A6_Ian_Li?=" , "PostgreSQL Performance" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1178574927.533849.90730@e51g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> <463FFF76.5070108@gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5b0f9334669ddffd X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200705/93 X-Sequence-Number: 24483 On 5/8/07, david@lang.hm wrote: [snip] > I personally don't trust reiserfs, jfs seems to be a tools for > transitioning from AIX more then anything else [...] What makes you say this? I have run JFS for years with complete satisfaction, and I have never logged into an AIX box. JFS has traditionally been seen as an underdog, but undeservedly so, in my opinion; one cause might be the instability of the very early releases, which seems to have tainted its reputation, or the alienness of its AIX heritage. However, every benchmark I have come across puts its on par with, and often surpassing, the more popular file systems in performance. In particular, JFS seems to shine with respect to CPU overhead. Alexander.