On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Dave Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 16-Mar-08, at 3:04 PM, Craig James wrote: > > Just out of curiosity: Last time I did research, the word seemed to > > be that xfs was better than ext2 or ext3. Is that not true? Why > > use ext2/3 at all if xfs is faster for Postgres? > > > I would like to see the evidence of this. I doubt that it would be > faster than ext2. There is no journaling on ext2.
Well, if you're dropping a large table ext2/3 has that very long wait thing that can happen. Don't know how much battery backed cache would help. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
