On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 11:33:41PM -0700, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > [reposted due to delivery error -jwb] > > I just took delivery of a new system, and used the opportunity to > benchmark postgresql 8.0 performance on various filesystems. The system > in question runs Linux 2.6.12, has one CPU and 1GB of system memory, and > 5 7200RPM SATA disks attached to an Areca hardware RAID controller > having 128MB of cache. The caches are all write-back. > > I ran pgbench with a scale factor of 1000 and a total of 100,000 > transactions per run. I varied the number of clients between 10 and > 100. It appears from my test JFS is much faster than both ext3 and XFS > for this workload. JFS and XFS were made with the mkfs defaults. ext3 > was made with -T largefile4 and -E stride=32. The deadline scheduler > was used for all runs (anticipatory scheduler is much worse). > > Here's the result, in transactions per second. > > ext3 jfs xfs > ----------------------------- > 10 Clients 55 81 68 > 100 Clients 61 100 64 > ----------------------------
BTW, it'd be interesting to see how UFS on FreeBSD compared. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?" ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
