Jim, I did another test with ext3 using data=writeback, and indeed it's much better: Avg: 429.87 Stdev: 77 A bit (very tiny bit) faster than xfs and bit slower than jfs. Still, very much improved. Bye, Guy. On 3/23/06, Jim Nasby <jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mar 23, 2006, at 11:32 AM, Bernhard Weisshuhn wrote: > > > Just Someone wrote: > > > >> 2 10K SCSI disks in RAID1 for OS and WAL (with it's own partiton on > >> ext3), > > > > You'll want the WAL on its own spindle. IIRC a separate partition > > on a shared disc won't give you much benefit. The idea is to keep > > the disc's head from moving away for other tasks. Or so they say. > > Actually, the OS partitions are normally quiet enough that it won't > make a huge difference, unless you're really hammering the database > all the time. > -- > Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 > vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org > -- Family management on rails: http://www.famundo.com - coming soon! My develpment related blog: http://devblog.famundo.com
