I have seen various benchmarks where XFS seems to perform best when it
comes to huge amounts of data and many files (due to balanced internal
also, XFS seems to be VERY mature and very stable.
ext2/3 don't seem to be that fast in most of the benchmarks.
i did some testing with reiser some time ago. the problem is that it
seems to restore a very historic consistent snapshot of the data. XFS
seems to be much better in this respect.
i have not tested JFS yet (but on this damn AIX beside me)
from my point of view i strongly recommend XFS (maybe somebody from
RedHat should think about it).
Neil Conway wrote:
>Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>The paper does recommend ext3, but the differences between file systems
>>are very small.
>Well, I only did a very rough benchmark (a few runs of pgbench), but
>the results I found were drastically different: ext2 was significantly
>faster (~50%) than ext3-writeback, which was in turn significantly
>faster (~25%) than ext3-ordered.
>>Also, though ext3 is slower, turning fsync off should make ext3 function
>>similar to ext2.
>Why would that be?
*Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig*
Ludo-Hartmannplatz 1/14, A-1160 Vienna, Austria
Tel: +43/1/913 68 09; +43/664/233 90 75
www.postgresql.at <http://www.postgresql.at>, cluster.postgresql.at
<http://www.cybertec.at>, kernel.cybertec.at <http://kernel.cybertec.at>
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]