Re: Perfomance Tuning
От
scott.marlowe
Тема
Re: Perfomance Tuning
Дата
Msg-id
Pine.LNX.4.33.0308110845360.1574-100000@css120.ihs.com
Ответ на
Re: Perfomance Tuning (Andrew Sullivan)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: Perfomance Tuning Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
Re: Perfomance Tuning Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
Re: Perfomance Tuning Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Re: Perfomance Tuning Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>
Re: Perfomance Tuning Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: Perfomance Tuning Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
Re: Perfomance Tuning Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
Re: Perfomance Tuning Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Perfomance Tuning Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 09:40:20AM -0700, Jonathan Gardner wrote: > > > > Redhat puts ext3 on by default. Consider switching to a non-journaling FS > > (ext2?) with the partition that holds your data and WAL. > > I would give you exactly the opposite advice: _never_ use a > non-journalling fs for your data and WAL. I suppose if you can > afford to lose some transactions, you can do without journalling. > Otherwise, you're just borrowing trouble, near as I can tell. I'd argue that a reliable filesystem (ext2) is still better than a questionable journaling filesystem (ext3 on kernels <2.4.20). This isn't saying to not use jounraling, but I would definitely test it under load first to make sure it's not gonna lose data or get corrupted.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления