David Lang wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Chris wrote:
>
>> The only other thing I can see is the old server is ext2:
>> /dev/hda4 on / type ext2 (rw,errors=remount-ro)
>>
>> the new one is ext3:
>> /dev/hda2 on / type ext3 (rw)
>
>
> this is actually a fairly significant difference.
>
> with ext3 most of your data actually gets written twice, once to the
> journal and a second time to the spot on the disk it's actually going to
> live.
>
> in addition there are significant differences in how things are arranged
> on disk between the two filesystems, (overridable at mount, but only
> changes future new files). the ext3 layout is supposed to be better for
> a general purpose filesystem, but I've found common cases (lots of files
> and directories) where it's significantly slower, and I think postgres
> will fall into those layouts.
>
> try makeing a xfs filesystem for your postgres data and see what sort of
> performance you get on it.
Interesting.
To be honest I think I'm just lucky with my really old server. I can't
see any particular tweaks in regards to drives or anything else. I have
another server running postgres 7.4.something and it's as slow as the
8.1 system.
#1 is running 2.4.x kernel - pg 7.4 (debian package) - good performance.
ext2.
#2 is running 2.2.x kernel (I know I know).. - pg 7.4 (debian package)
- reasonable performance. ext2.
#3 is running 2.6.x kernel - pg 8.1 (fedora package) - reasonable
performance. ext3.
--
Postgresql & php tutorials
http://www.designmagick.com/