I also thought that LVM is unsafe for WAL logs and file system journals with disk write cache -- it doesn't flush the disk write caches correctly and build write barriers.
As pointed out here:
http://groups.google.com/group/pgsql.performance/browse_thread/thread/9dc43991c1887129
by Greg Smith
http://lwn.net/Articles/283161/
As pointed out here:
http://groups.google.com/group/pgsql.performance/browse_thread/thread/9dc43991c1887129
by Greg Smith
http://lwn.net/Articles/283161/
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Alan Hodgson <ahodgson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thursday 11 September 2008, david@xxxxxxx wrote:I used to feel this way until LVM became usable. LVM plus online resizable
> while I agree with you in theory, in practice I've seen multiple
> partitions cause far more problems than they have prevented (due to the
> partitions ending up not being large enough and having to be resized
> after they fill up, etc) so I tend to go in the direction of a few large
> partitions.
filesystems really makes multiple partitions manageable.
--
Alan
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
