Reiser is good for lots of small files. ext3 would is better for
large ones. At least that's what I get from the benchmark data that I've
seen posted in various places.
Curtis
--
Curtis Maurand
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.maurand.com
On Wed, 12 May 2004, Roy Butler wrote:
Jacob,
I'd go
On 14 May 2004, at 4:37 am, Roy Butler wrote:
Jacob,
>> I'd go with Reiser on SuSE.
>
> What about Reiser on Debian?
I'd choose SuSE since Reiser is their default filesystem and they have
been an early implementor of Reiser-related patches. If you use Linux
kernel 2.4.24 (or later) and the lat
Jacob,
>> I'd go with Reiser on SuSE.
>
> What about Reiser on Debian?
I'd choose SuSE since Reiser is their default filesystem and they have
been an early implementor of Reiser-related patches. If you use Linux
kernel 2.4.24 (or later) and the latest 3.6 series of ReiserFS+tools,
the Linux di
Tim Cutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jacob Friis Larsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: fastest filesystem for MySQL
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 11:16:18AM -0400, Peter J Milanese wrote:
> Does the filesystem matter as much as disk throughput? I&#x
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 11:16:18AM -0400, Peter J Milanese wrote:
> Does the filesystem matter as much as disk throughput? I'd imagine that
> is where the bottleneck would be, at least as I've seen...
Throughput or seek time?
Jeremy
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Y
ECTED]
Subject:Re: fastest filesystem for MySQL
On 13 May 2004, at 4:02 pm, Jacob Friis Larsen wrote:
>> I'd go with Reiser on SuSE.
>
> What about Reiser on Debian?
>
It shouldn't matter too much. This functionality is in the kernel, so
if the ker
On 13 May 2004, at 4:02 pm, Jacob Friis Larsen wrote:
I'd go with Reiser on SuSE.
What about Reiser on Debian?
It shouldn't matter too much. This functionality is in the kernel, so
if the kernel version on SuSE and Debian is the same, the filesystem
code will be the same, with the possible cav
I'd go with Reiser on SuSE.
What about Reiser on Debian?
Thanks,
Jacob
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 10:21:15AM +0200, JFL wrote:
> > The InnoDB storage engine can use raw disks without a filesystem.
>
> Would that be the fastest possible setup?
Probably, yes.
Jeremy
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo!
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jere
The InnoDB storage engine can use raw disks without a filesystem.
Would that be the fastest possible setup?
Thanks,
Jacob
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jacob,
I'd go with Reiser on SuSE. Like Sasha mentioned though, the filesystem
component may have little overall effect, depending on your set-up. I'd
stay away from XFS when working with databases, as its performance gains
are achieved via extended write delays while the queue sits in main
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 12:39:59PM -0500, Chris W wrote:
> I thouught I read somewhere a while back that MySQL was working on an
> option to create a MySQL partition so as to avoide all OS filesystem
> overhead to speed things up and I think to save a small bit of over
> head. Is this true?
Th
I thouught I read somewhere a while back that MySQL was working on an
option to create a MySQL partition so as to avoide all OS filesystem
overhead to speed things up and I think to save a small bit of over
head. Is this true?
Chris W.
--
Bring Back the HP 15C
http://hp15c.org:8080
If you don'
Sasha Pachev wrote:
Based on what I've seen so far, JFS and XFS do not yet have a solid
track record of stability with MySQL. This does not mean they could
not be good - I just do not trust them yet. I do vaguely remember a
support case when a very strange corruption happened on either one of
Robert J Taylor wrote:
Completely depends on your situation -- big files, small files? Lots of
writes or reads or both? Growing tables/files or lots of large dropped
tables?
If you're into small files, go Reiser. Big data, JFS or XFS.
EXT3 is slow, but, IIRC, it also is a true data journaling f
>> I've heard and read that the Reiser filesystem should be better for
>> MySQL than Ext3. Is this still true?
>>
>> We will be running MySQL on either Red Hat ES 3, Suse or Debian.
>>
Completely depends on your situation -- big files, small files? Lots of
writes or reads or both? Growing tables/f
Completely depends on your situation -- big files, small files? Lots of
writes or reads or both? Growing tables/files or lots of large dropped
tables?
If you're into small files, go Reiser. Big data, JFS or XFS.
EXT3 is slow, but, IIRC, it also is a true data journaling filesystem
while some
17 matches
Mail list logo
