I have been experimenting with empirical tests of file system and device
level writes to determine the actual constraints in order to speed up the WAL
logging code.
Using a raw file partition and a time-based technique for determining the
optimal write position, I am able to get 8K writes physical
I have been experimenting with empirical tests of file system and device
level writes to determine the actual constraints in order to speed up the WAL
logging code.
Using a raw file partition and a time-based technique for determining the
optimal write position, I am able to get 8K writes physical
"Curtis Faith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Using a raw file partition and a time-based technique for determining the
> optimal write position, I am able to get 8K writes physically written to disk
> synchronously in the range of 500 to 650 writes per second using FreeBSD raw
> device partitions o
tom lane wrote:
> What can you do *without* using a raw partition?
>
> I dislike that idea for two reasons: portability and security. The
> portability disadvantages are obvious. And in ordinary system setups
> Postgres would have to run as root in order to write on a raw partition.
>
> It occurs
Curtis, have you considered comparing raw writes versus file system writes
on a raw multi-disk partition?
I always set up my machines to store data on a mirror set (RAID1) or RAID5
set, and it seems your method should be tested there too.
P.s., Tom, the postgresql user would NOT need to run as
Bravo Curtis,
This is all excellent research.
:-)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
Curtis Faith wrote:
> Disk space is much cheaper than CPU and memory so I think that a logging
> system that used as much as three or four times the space but is three or
> four times faster would be a wo