Re: Tuning Postgresql on FreeBSD 5.1

From: Terry Lambert (tlambert2_at_mindspring.com)
Date: 08/27/03

  • Next message: Bill Moran: "Re: Performance tests I did with FreeBSD, Linux and PostgreSQL" 
    Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 03:26:17 -0700
To: Maciej Freudenheim <fahren@student.uci.agh.edu.pl>

    Maciej Freudenheim wrote:
    > > issues (if for no other reason than UFS+softupdates). Linux has
    > > problems with memory over commit situations and file system integrity
    > > while still maintaining reasonable file system performance (ext2 is
    > > faster than ext3 by a wide margin, but ext2 is _not_ a reliable FS).
    >
    > Even heard of reiserfs or xfs?
    > I'm not going to start Linux advocacy here, but it's so funny for me
    > when somebody says 'leenoox sux, it has crappy filesystem' that i can't
    > leave it without reply :)

    He didn't say that. He said that it had problems with memory
    overcommit situations; most OS's do. FreeBSD has done a lot
    of work on graceful degradation (i.e. it doesn't crash when it
    runs out of memory and there's no more swap available). So it's
    you whose bringing that interpretation to the data.

    I haven't seen any reasonable benchmarks on ReiserFS or XFS vs.
    Ext2FS or Ext3FS that didn't involve sticking too many files in
    a single directory and actually measuring btree vs. linear
    directory entry layout instead of actual raw I/O performance.
    For most modern hardware, you never get CPU bound, so the real
    determining factor on raw I/O performance is almost always going
    to be raw disk I/O speed, and safe speed is going to be lower
    than the manufacturer benchmarks; some disks are "unsafe at any
    speed", to paraphrase Ralph Nader, because they cache when you
    tell them not to using the commands the manufacturer has stated
    actually work to tell them not to.

    Also, FYI, Postgress, unlike Postfix or qmail, doesn't dump a
    zillion files into the same directory so they can measure
    themselves against a situational benchmark; they are actually
    smart enough to port to the POSIX interface, and not depend on
    FS implementation-specific tricks to get their performance.

    If you wanted to join the XFS porting project, I'm sure they'd
    like the help. If you wanted to port ReiserFS, realize that
    software patents will probably prevent your work from being
    used in the U.S. or Japan, unless you could prove it to be
    non-infringing on the Novell D.O.W. patents.

    -- Terry
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

  • Next message: Bill Moran: "Re: Performance tests I did with FreeBSD, Linux and PostgreSQL"

    Relevant Pages

    • Heavy disk activity without apperant reason (added more info)
      ... On my AMD athlon system with 512MB memory I sometimes get a lot of disk ... the disk stays relativily quiet as expected with the load on the system. ... PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xfb470, ... Reiserfs journal params: device sda6, size 8192, journal first block 18, ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: ReiseFS vs XFS
      ... > installation of the Debian system with XFS. ... ReiserFS is faster than ext3 ONLY for files under 4kB. ... would use the ext3 filesystem. ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: Opinions XFS
      ... I've had power cuts on XFS systems and I've never lost any data that wasn't in the process of being written. ... In any filesystem you're going to lose data in a power cut, and there aren't a lot of situations where a truncated file is useful to me anyway, so I don't generally worry too much about that, as long as the filesystem itself stays intact. ... I kind of shy away from ReiserFS now, partly because it seems fragile, and partly because of doubts about its future -- ReiserFS v3 is no longer being maintained, v4 is incompatible, and the original designer is no longer involved with the project due to unrelated legal problems. ... To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with a subject of "unsubscribe". ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: reiser4 plugins
      ... Very robust, but at the same time slooow. ... So I gave xfs another try. ... Still not that fast as reiserfs, IIRC, but better than the first time ... > fact it felt slower than reiserfs V3, ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [BENCHMARK] I/O regression after 2.6.0-test5
      ... we've seen similar regression on tiobench and reaim workloads. ... >> Sequential Reads jfs ... >> Sequential Reads reiserfs ... >> Sequential Reads xfs ...
      (Linux-Kernel)