pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
To: Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:10:45 -0700
Message-ID: <dcc563d10911100910y9229f50pdc150f3ea41ae9e8@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AF99DC2.9040607@emolecules.com>
References: <8a1bfe660911100355l34a557ffj8244079c1fb689b5@mail.gmail.com>
	<hdbrv8$p35$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<8a1bfe660911100700l2a44f638m97ea6136b65deb21@mail.gmail.com>
	<hdbvqt$7v8$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<8a1bfe660911100729q42ac732cga9bbadd52e2533dd@mail.gmail.com>
	<4AF99666.5090705@2ndquadrant.com>
	<8a1bfe660911100852l5573ab30ne91c6d8937dc836b@mail.gmail.com>
	<4AF99DC2.9040607@emolecules.com>

On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Craig James
<craig_james@emolecules.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>
>> Given the current quality of Linux code, I hesitate to use anything but
>> ext3
>> because I consider that just barely reliable enough even as the most
>> popular
>> filesystem by far.  JFS and XFS have some benefits to them, but none so
>> compelling to make up for how much less testing they get.  That said,
>> there
>> seem to be a fair number of people happily running high-performance
>> PostgreSQL instances on XFS.
>
> I thought the common wisdom was to use ext2 for the WAL, since the WAL is a
> journal system, and ext3 would essentially be journaling the journal.  Is
> that not true?

Yep, ext2 for pg_xlog is fine.



view thread (23+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <dcc563d10911100910y9229f50pdc150f3ea41ae9e8@mail.gmail.com>
Permalink:  ../dcc563d10911100910y9229f50pdc150f3ea41ae9e8@mail.gmail.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/dcc563d10911100910y9229f50pdc150f3ea41ae9e8@mail.gmail.com

 · 

reply
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: scott.marlowe@gmail.com, craig_james@emolecules.com
  Subject: Re: limiting performance impact of wal archiving.
  In-Reply-To: <dcc563d10911100910y9229f50pdc150f3ea41ae9e8@mail.gmail.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