X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F0C69FA508 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2006 23:42:55 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 76004-01 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2006 23:42:47 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mail.mi8.com (d01gw02.mi8.com [63.240.6.46]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5981C9FB0D1 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2006 23:42:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: from 172.16.1.110 by mail.mi8.com with ESMTP (- Welcome to Mi8 Corporation www.Mi8.com (D2)); Tue, 01 Aug 2006 22:42:40 -0400 X-Server-Uuid: 7829E76E-BB9E-4995-8473-3C0929DF7DD1 Received: from MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com ([172.16.1.160]) by D01SMTP01.Mi8.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 1 Aug 2006 22:42:40 -0400 Received: from 69.181.100.71 ([69.181.100.71]) by MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com ( [172.16.1.219]) via Exchange Front-End Server mi8owa.mi8.com ( [172.16.1.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 2 Aug 2006 02:42:39 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620 Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 19:42:37 -0700 Subject: Re: XFS filessystem for Datawarehousing From: "Luke Lonergan" To: "Milen Kulev" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] XFS filessystem for Datawarehousing Thread-Index: Aca13VCGjuuYgSHQEduMOAAWy4o9DA== In-Reply-To: <012d01c6b5b4$6db33680$0a00a8c0@trivadis.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Aug 2006 02:42:40.0611 (UTC) FILETIME=[52AD0B30:01C6B5DD] X-WSS-ID: 68CECEAA3782645684-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.668 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, FORGED_RCVD_HELO, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200608/21 X-Sequence-Number: 20206 Milen, On 8/1/06 2:49 PM, "Milen Kulev" wrote: > Is anyone using XFS for storing/retrieving relatively large amount of data (~ > 200GB)? I concur with the previous poster's experiences with one additional observation: We have had instabilities with XFS with software RAID (md) on 32-bit Xeons running RedHat4 U3 with the Centos 4.3 unsupported SMP kernel. XFS would occasionally kernel panic under load. We have had no problems with XFS running on the same OS/kernel on 64-bit under heavy workloads for weeks of continuous usage. Each server (of 16 total) had four XFS filesystems, each with 250GB of table data (no indexes) on them, total of 16 Terabytes. We tested with the TPC-H schema and queries. We use the default settings for XFS. Also - be aware that LVM has a serious performance bottleneck at about 600MB/s - if you are working below that threshold, you may not notice the issue, maybe some increase in CPU consumption as you approach it. - Luke