On Jul 26, 2010, at 12:45 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Yeb Havinga wrote:
>> I did some ext3,ext4,xfs,jfs and also ext2 tests on the just-in-memory
>> read/write test. (scale 300) No real winners or losers, though ext2
>> isn't really faster and the manual need for fix (y) during boot makes
>> it impractical in its standard configuration.
>
> That's what happens every time I try it too. The theoretical benefits
> of ext2 for hosting PostgreSQL just don't translate into significant
> performance increases on database oriented tests, certainly not ones
> that would justify the downside of having fsck issues come back again.
> Glad to see that holds true on this hardware too.
>
ext2 is slow for many reasons. ext4 with no journal is significantly faster than ext2. ext4 with a journal is faster
thanext2.
> --
> Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
> PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
> greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.us
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance