Josh Berkus wrote: > > >> First, none of the general purpose filesystems I've seen so far do data > >> journalling per default, since it's a huge performance penalty, even for > >> non-RDBMS workloads. The feature you talk about is ext3 specific (and > >> should be pointed out as such) and only disables write ordering, meaning > >> that metadata and file content updates are not synchronized. > > > > You are right that my docs were misleading. I have improved them by > > mentioning that it is _data_ flush that as part of journalling that can > > be a problem, and documented that the mount option listed is > > ext3-specific, not linux-specific. > > Actually, I think that some of the other journalling filesystems allow > data journalling (I know ReiserFS does), they just don't default to it. > For that matter, a few (ZFS in particular) have data journalling which > can't be turned off. While it's not a tuning parameter, users should be > warned that they'll take a performance hit from it.
So I assume you are saying the docs are fine now. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
