X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0CF69DD670
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  1 Dec 2005 14:03:23 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 10221-03
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  1 Dec 2005 14:03:20 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from floppy.pyrenet.fr (news.pyrenet.fr [194.116.145.2])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9E0C9DCAB5
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  1 Dec 2005 14:03:20 -0400 (AST)
Received: by floppy.pyrenet.fr (Postfix, from userid 106)
	id F175C3368C; Thu,  1 Dec 2005 19:03:20 +0100 (MET)
From: "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu>
X-Newsgroups: pgsql.performance
Subject: Re: filesystem performance with lots of files
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 13:03:20 -0500
Organization: Hub.Org Networking Services
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <dmndri$c39$1@news.hub.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0512010616200.2807@qnivq.ynat.uz>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.hub.org
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 required=5 tests=[none]
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200512/29
X-Sequence-Number: 15850


"David Lang" <dlang@invendra.net> wrote
>
> a few weeks ago I did a series of tests to compare different filesystems. 
> the test was for a different purpose so the particulars are not what I 
> woud do for testing aimed at postgres, but I think the data is relavent) 
> and I saw major differences between different filesystems, I'll see aobut 
> re-running the tests to get a complete set of benchmarks in the next few 
> days. My tests had their times vary from 4 min to 80 min depending on the 
> filesystem in use (ext3 with hash_dir posted the worst case). what testing 
> have other people done with different filesystems?
>

That's good ... what benchmarks did you used?

Regards,
Qingqing