Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123A29F9D13 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 21:12:10 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 66678-06 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 21:12:02 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com (rv-out-0910.google.com [209.85.198.185]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE3A9F9D11 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 21:12:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id l15so1471838rvb for ; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 17:12:05 -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=MKpN89SnF3lRJcFsL8xAtfZj4BAUJg94DZEB9mJj1oe12x9FVFXVv2FQG2N79IOShIS6ofNdQySFr9R1NfxX7sVagTxTc8WZEC5LqTzduG74VObQsiNQzY3GGlJgdmoOEK5m0n3SmwCgnQg54NLrCrw931yJvxJupYBUPTfVw3U= 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=ucBw4zdJd7nG5KS6oQhZ1iJ3cU4rvwjliVGt/+XXUMkxgmaoqREswLxEmnsB1j4pgVAJosZ/um++BFAiN+MSBEjLcBXRziCeISrEFcHkZJ62sWk5wXxwe2c8/eXCXubFeb6Y3mAIPIL4Yn9UgPlbBvTPR6NdTB9nUhwQOn/nTdE= Received: by 10.141.52.5 with SMTP id e5mr3070197rvk.1189037524929; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 17:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.159.11 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 17:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 19:12:04 -0500 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers" Subject: Re: Performance on 8CPU's and 32GB of RAM Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <20070905231921.GA28600@mail.planetcobalt.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <46DE66CF.9000903@theendofthetunnel.de> <90bce5730709051016j5291827dx525d6b8fe4960fbd@mail.gmail.com> <20070905210212.GA26941@mail.planetcobalt.net> <20070905231921.GA28600@mail.planetcobalt.net> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200709/69 X-Sequence-Number: 26614 On 9/5/07, Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers wrote: > On 2007-09-05 Scott Marlowe wrote: > > On 9/5/07, Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers wrote: > >> On 2007-09-05 Scott Marlowe wrote: > >>> 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. > >> > >> Uh... what? Locking isn't done by the filesystem but by applications > >> (which certainly can decide to not lock a file when opening it). And > >> no one in his right mind would ever have a virus scanner access the > >> files of a running database, regardless of operating system or > >> filesystem. > > > > Exactly, the default is to lock the file. The application has to > > explicitly NOT lock it. It's the opposite of linux. > > Yes. So? It's still up to the application, and it still has nothing at > all to do with the filesystem. And if you look at my original reply, you'll see that I said WINDOWS / NTFS. not just NTFS. i.e. it's a windowsism. > > > And be careful, you're insulting a LOT of people who have come on this > > list with the exact problem of having their anti-virus scramble the > > brain of their postgresql installation. It's a far more common > > problem than it should be. > > How does that make it any less stup^Wintellectually challenged? It doesn't. It's just not necessary to insult people to make a point.