On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:25:43 +1100, Pete de Zwart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> improvement on I/O compared to the improvement potential of moving to
> SCSI/FCAL, that and getting more memory.
>
I would like to ask the question that continues to loom large over all
DBAs. SCSI, FCAL and SAT
Thanks for the info.
I managed to pull out some archived posts to this list from the PostgreSQL
web site about this issue which have helped a bit.
Unfortunatly, the FS has been chosen before considering the impact of it on
I/O for PostgreSQL. As the Cluster is sitting on it's on 200GB IDE drive
Greetings to one and all,
I've been trying to find some information on selecting an optimal
filesystem setup for a volume that will only contain a PostgreSQL Database
Cluster under Linux. Searching through the mailing list archive showed some
promising statistics on the various filesystems
After a long battle with technology, "Pete de Zwart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, an
earthling, wrote:
> Greetings to one and all,
>
> I've been trying to find some information on selecting an optimal
> filesystem setup for a volume that will only contain a PostgreSQL Database
> Cluster under Linux.
