On 12/03/2013 10:44 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
All, https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/11/24/133 What this means for us: http://citusdata.com/blog/72-linux-memory-manager-and-your-big-data It seems clear that Kernel.org, since 2.6, has been in the business of pushing major, hackish, changes to the IO stack without testing them or even thinking too hard about what the side-effects might be. This is perhaps unsurprising given that two of the largest sponsors of the Kernel -- who, incidentally, do 100% of the performance testing -- don't use the IO stack. This says to me that Linux will clearly be an undependable platform in the future with the potential to destroy PostgreSQL performance without warning, leaving us scrambling for workarounds. Too bad the alternatives are so unpopular. I don't know where we'll get the resources to implement our own storage, but it's looking like we don't have a choice.
This seems rather half cocked. I read the article. They found a problem, that really will only affect a reasonably small percentage of users, created a test case, reported it, and a patch was produced.
Kind of like how we do it. JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 509-416-6579 PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC, @cmdpromptinc For my dreams of your image that blossoms a rose in the deeps of my heart. - W.B. Yeats -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
