greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Greg Smith) writes: > Yeb Havinga wrote: >> * What filesystem to use on the SSD? To minimize writes and maximize >> chance for seeing errors I'd choose ext2 here. > > I don't consider there to be any reason to deploy any part of a > PostgreSQL database on ext2. The potential for downtime if the fsck > doesn't happen automatically far outweighs the minimal performance > advantage you'll actually see in real applications. Ah, but if the goal is to try to torture the SSD as cruelly as possible, these aren't necessarily downsides (important or otherwise). I don't think ext2 helps much in "maximizing chances of seeing errors" in notably useful ways, as the extra "torture" that takes place as part of the post-remount fsck isn't notably PG-relevant. (It's not obvious that errors encountered would be readily mapped to issues relating to PostgreSQL.) I think the WAL-oriented test would be *way* more useful; inducing work whose "brokenness" can be measured in one series of files in one directory should be way easier than trying to find changes across a whole PG cluster. I don't expect the filesystem choice to be terribly significant to that. -- "cbbrowne","@","gmail.com" "Heuristics (from the French heure, "hour") limit the amount of time spent executing something. [When using heuristics] it shouldn't take longer than an hour to do something." -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
