On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 7:53 AM, k...@rice.edu <k...@rice.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 02:45:36PM +0000, Campbell, Lance wrote: >> PostgreSQL 9.0.x >> When PostgreSQL storage is using a relatively large raid 5 or 6 array is >> there any value in having your tables distributed across multiple >> tablespaces if those tablespaces will exists on the same raid array? I >> understand the value if you were to have the tablespaces on different raid >> arrays. But what about on the same one? >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Lance Campbell >> Software Architect >> Web Services at Public Affairs >> 217-333-0382 >> > > I have seen previous discussions about using different filesystems versus > a single filesystem and one advantage that multiple tablespaces have is > that an fsync on one table/tablespace would not block or be blocked by > an fsync on a different table/tablespace at the OS level.
Another advantage is that you can use a non-journaling FS for the WAL (ext2) and a journaling FS for the data (ext4 etc.). I was told that there's no reason to use a journaling fs for the WAL since the WAL is a journal. Craig -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
