From: Luke Lonergan <llonergan@greenplum.com>
To: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: XFS filessystem for Datawarehousing
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 21:05:05 -0700
Message-ID: <C0F6C401.2D141%llonergan@greenplum.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060802233336.GN2900@mathom.us>
Again - the performance difference increases as the disk speed increases.
Our experience is that we went from 300MB/s to 475MB/s when moving from ext3
to xfs.
- Luke
On 8/2/06 4:33 PM, "Michael Stone" <mstone+postgres@mathom.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 02:26:39PM -0700, Steve Poe wrote:
>> For the past year, I have been running odbc-bench on a dual-opteron with
>> 4GB of RAM using a 8GB sample data. I found the performance difference
>> between EXT3, JFS, and XFS is +/- 5-8%.
>
> That's not surprising when your db is only 2x your RAM. You'll find that
> filesystem performance is much more important when your database is 10x+
> your RAM (which is often the case once your database heads toward a TB).
>
>> Testing newer kernels and read-ahead patches may benefit you as well.
>
> I've been really impressed by the adaptive readahead patches with
> postgres.
>
> Mike Stone
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: llonergan@greenplum.com, mstone+postgres@mathom.us
Subject: Re: XFS filessystem for Datawarehousing
In-Reply-To: <C0F6C401.2D141%llonergan@greenplum.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox