Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00D77475E82 for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 10:27:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from clearmetrix.com (unknown [209.92.142.67]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C84D475C9E for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 10:27:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from clearmetrix.com (chw.muvpn.clearmetrix.com [172.16.1.3] (may be forged)) by clearmetrix.com (8.11.6/linuxconf) with ESMTP id g93ER0V13724; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 10:27:00 -0400 Message-ID: <3D9C53B3.2050508@clearmetrix.com> Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 10:26:59 -0400 From: "Charles H. Woloszynski" X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in Cc: pgsql-general Subject: Re: Large databases, performance References: <3D9C8712.9513.9C6521D@localhost> <3D9C9B8A.30310.A16469F@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200210/121 X-Sequence-Number: 31120 Forgive my ignorance, but what about 2.4.19-16 is that much faster? Are we talking about 2x improvement for your tests? We are currently on 2.4.9 and looking at the performance and wondering... so any comments are appreciated. Charlie Shridhar Daithankar wrote: >And BTW, all these results were on reiserfs. We didn't found much of difference >in write performance between them. So we stick to reiserfs. And of course we >got the latest hot shot Mandrake9 with 2.4.19-16 which really made difference >over RHL7.2.. > >Bye > Shridhar > >-- >QOTD: "Do you smell something burning or is it me?" -- Joan of Arc > > >---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > >http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html > > -- Charles H. Woloszynski ClearMetrix, Inc. 115 Research Drive Bethlehem, PA 18015 tel: 610-419-2210 x400 fax: 240-371-3256 web: www.clearmetrix.com