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 ----------------------------
I would be curious as to what options were passed to jfs and xfs. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake
BTW, it'd be interesting to see how UFS on FreeBSD compared.
-- Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
