Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B98F89FA35A
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed,  5 Sep 2007 16:37:00 -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 03601-01 for
	<pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed,  5 Sep 2007 16:36:53 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5
Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com (rv-out-0910.google.com
 [209.85.198.190])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7749C9F9F31
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Wed,  5 Sep 2007 16:36:49 -0300 (ADT)
Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id l15so1422328rvb
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta;
	h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
	b=f8076f8UbW/xY0c73SOWrQvbnj1HC6gei2ksFo97Ioivu7vfZ8X9tDCNqyRgC2te9+9sS0MAQyT6QvHcTVA5JbQtmogpFXKzPvdfRieVoOkTkrCNXrVPBALkFJwyPeQbGYPOL/O3oD3qvoWzaAQCZPyuC92hsPUA8jWrZFxuCSY=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta;
	h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
	b=tGbMKkhDLLnGlbT3qiNMJfHfPr5+fpIubBPjyH6URLkECol5n+YiLP+Pa38Qeo2y1j8QOUGOi2ik5M5KFc3WUssnMSY0B1+6jSd1hW4tAoh0vsYA2qxDWhTxE27+QcqT0VnW98Sbiv4UxGn2xbXD5yDrBSOaweZ4jDVrHHU/rIg=
Received: by 10.141.78.14 with SMTP id f14mr2968645rvl.1189021003776;
	Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:36:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.141.159.11 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 12:36:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <dcc563d10709051236o60f852cdne392937704830200@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:36:43 -0500
From: "Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
To: "Trevor Talbot" <quension@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Performance on 8CPU's and 32GB of RAM
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <90bce5730709051016j5291827dx525d6b8fe4960fbd@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <fbkn5d$cfq$1@news.hub.org>
 <20070904230639.GA23731@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<dcc563d10709041615s305ae98bm92dee61ab199b7c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<46DE66CF.9000903@theendofthetunnel.de> <fbmhjt$d51$1@news.hub.org>
	<dcc563d10709050845k135d3c2erbe5b44933e898aa@mail.gmail.com>
	<90bce5730709051016j5291827dx525d6b8fe4960fbd@mail.gmail.com>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200709/59
X-Sequence-Number: 26604

On 9/5/07, Trevor Talbot <quension@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/5/07, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 9/5/07, Carlo Stonebanks <stonec.register@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > > > Right, additionally NTFS is really nothing to use on any serious disc
> > > > array.
> > >
> > > Do you mean that I will not see any big improvement if I upgrade the disk
> > > subsystem because the client is using NTFS (i.e. Windows)
> >
> > No, I think he's referring more to the lack of reliability of NTFS
> > compared to UFS / ZFS / JFS / XFS on unixen.
>
> Lack of reliability compared to _UFS_?  Can you elaborate on this?

Oh, the other issue that NTFS still seems to suffer from that most
unix file systems have overcome is fragmentation.  Since you can't
defrag a live system, you have to plan time to take down the db should
the NTFS partition for your db get overly fragmented.

And there's the issue that with windows / NTFS that when one process
opens a file for read, it locks it for all other users.  This means
that things like virus scanners can cause odd, unpredictable failures
of your database.