On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:27 PM, Zygo Blaxell
ce3g8...@umail.furryterror.org wrote:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:31:02PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
I'm curious as to whether +C has any effect on BTRFS's durability, too.
I would expect it to be strictly equal to or worse than the CoW
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 06:07:09AM +, Duncan wrote:
4.0 is out. There's reason people may want to stick one version back by
default, to 3.19 currently, since it can take a few weeks for early
reports to develop into a coherent problem, and sticking one stable
series back allows for
On 20-04-15 06:27, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
I'm curious as to whether +C has any effect on BTRFS's durability, too.
I would expect it to be strictly equal to or worse than the CoW
durability.
In addition to the stuff pointed out, I've wondered about this:
PostgreSQL full_page_writes copies 8k
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:13:47AM +0200, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
On 20-04-15 06:27, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
I'm curious as to whether +C has any effect on BTRFS's durability, too.
I would expect it to be strictly equal to or worse than the CoW
durability.
In addition to the stuff
Zygo Blaxell posted on Mon, 20 Apr 2015 00:27:31 -0400 as excerpted:
Normal writes to btrfs filesystems using the versioned filesystem tree
are consistent(ish), atomic, and durable; however, they have high
latency as the filesystem normally delays commit until triggered by a
periodic timer
Hi all
I'm looking into the advisability of running PostgreSQL on BTRFS, and
after looking at the FAQ there's something I'm hoping you could
clarify.
The wiki FAQ says:
Btrfs does not force all dirty data to disk on every fsync or O_SYNC
operation, fsync is designed to be fast.
Is that wording
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 07:50:32PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 15:18:51 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 05:10:30PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 22:31:02 schrieb Craig Ringer:
I'm curious as to whether +C has any
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 15:18:51 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 05:10:30PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 22:31:02 schrieb Craig Ringer:
On 19 April 2015 at 22:28, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 18:18:24 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 07:50:32PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 15:18:51 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 05:10:30PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 22:31:02
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 08:41:39PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 18:18:24 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 07:50:32PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 15:18:51 schrieb Hugo Mills:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 05:10:30PM
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 05:10:30PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 22:31:02 schrieb Craig Ringer:
On 19 April 2015 at 22:28, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 21:20:11 schrieb Craig Ringer:
Hi all
Hi Craig,
On 19 April 2015 at 22:28, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 21:20:11 schrieb Craig Ringer:
Hi all
Hi Craig,
I'm looking into the advisability of running PostgreSQL on BTRFS, and
after looking at the FAQ there's something I'm hoping you could
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 22:31:02 schrieb Craig Ringer:
On 19 April 2015 at 22:28, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de
wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 21:20:11 schrieb Craig Ringer:
Hi all
Hi Craig,
I'm looking into the advisability of running PostgreSQL on BTRFS, and
While the discussion on -C was interesting, I'm really interested in
btrfs's fsync() behaviour, per the original post:
On 19 April 2015 at 21:20, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Hi all
I'm looking into the advisability of running PostgreSQL on BTRFS, and
after looking at the FAQ
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:31:02PM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 19 April 2015 at 22:28, Martin Steigerwald mar...@lichtvoll.de wrote:
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 21:20:11 schrieb Craig Ringer:
Hi all
Hi Craig,
I'm looking into the advisability of running PostgreSQL on BTRFS, and
Am Sonntag, 19. April 2015, 21:20:11 schrieb Craig Ringer:
Hi all
Hi Craig,
I'm looking into the advisability of running PostgreSQL on BTRFS, and
after looking at the FAQ there's something I'm hoping you could
clarify.
The wiki FAQ says:
Btrfs does not force all dirty data to disk on
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015, Craig Ringer cr...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
PostgreSQL is its self copy-on-write (because of multi-version
concurrency control), so it doesn't make much sense to have the FS
doing another layer of COW.
That's a matter of opinion.
I think it's great if PostgreSQL can do
17 matches
Mail list logo
