Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Jesper Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:09 PM, justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I chose to use ext3 on these partition
>
> You should really consider another file system. ext3 has two flaws
> that mean I can't really use it properly. A 2TB file system size
> limit (at least on the servers I've tested) and it locks the whole
> file system while deleting large files, which can take several seconds
> and stop ANYTHING from happening during that time. This means that
> dropping or truncating large tables in the middle of the day could
> halt your database for seconds at a time. This one misfeature means
> that ext2/3 are unsuitable for running under a database.
I cannot acknowledge or deny the last one, but the first one is not
true. I have several volumes in the 4TB+ range on ext3 performing nicely.
I can test the "large file stuff", but how large? .. several GB is not a
problem here.
Is this on a 64 bit or 32 bit machine? We had the problem with a 32
bit linux box (not sure what flavor) just a few months ago. I would
not create a filesystem on a partition of 2+TB
It is on a 64 bit machine.. but ext3 doesnt have anything specifik in it
as far as I know.. I have mountet filesystems created on 32 bit on 64
bit and the other way around. The filesystems are around years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext3 => Limit seems to be 16TB currently
(It might get down to something lower if you choose a small blocksize).
--
Jesper
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
