Bruce, In your document change which one can be placed on non-journalling file system? data? wal? or both?
For me it seems it's not clear. -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan > Josh Berkus wrote: > > > > >> First, none of the general purpose filesystems I've seen so far do data > > >> journalling per default, since it's a huge performance penalty, even for > > >> non-RDBMS workloads. The feature you talk about is ext3 specific (and > > >> should be pointed out as such) and only disables write ordering, meaning > > >> that metadata and file content updates are not synchronized. > > > > > > You are right that my docs were misleading. I have improved them by > > > mentioning that it is _data_ flush that as part of journalling that can > > > be a problem, and documented that the mount option listed is > > > ext3-specific, not linux-specific. > > > > Actually, I think that some of the other journalling filesystems allow > > data journalling (I know ReiserFS does), they just don't default to it. > > For that matter, a few (ZFS in particular) have data journalling which > > can't be turned off. While it's not a tuning parameter, users should be > > warned that they'll take a performance hit from it. > > So I assume you are saying the docs are fine now. > > -- > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us > EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com > > + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
