Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*XFS\s+for\s+postgres\s+databases\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*XFS\s+for\s+postgres\s+databases\?\s*$/: 61 ]

Total 61 documents matching your query.

1. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: ndeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 15:32:45 -0400; Feizhou wrote: Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: Until a few days ago I had a very large postgresql installation on XFS. We suffered very unusual problems like corrupt tables, missing rows, corrupt indexes, an; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00037.html (9,275 bytes)
2. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: xx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 16:04:33 -0400; XFS developers - there were a few notes about not reading from a block device with an XFS filesystem mounted (rw?). Will this interfere with lvm or device-mapper snapshots using the kernel vfs-lock p; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00039.html (8,945 bytes)
3. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: son <jerj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 16:05:53 -0400; Is there anything in the new 2.6 bio and queueing code that could replace pagebufs entirely? That would seem ideal. Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 04:56:24PM +1000, Nathan Scott wro; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00040.html (9,325 bytes)
4. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: son <jerj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:16:14 -0700; I was wondering about MD personally. As in, what happens when MD syncs a mirror or stripeset? Does XFS get upset? If XFS expects special treatment of its buffers, different from all other Linux files; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00044.html (8,530 bytes)
5. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: aker" <jwbaker@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 15:12:24 -0500; Jeremy Jackson wrote: Is there anything in the new 2.6 bio and queueing code that could replace pagebufs entirely? That would seem ideal. They are at a different level, bio's are a mechanism for read; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00045.html (9,590 bytes)
6. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: ilninja@xxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 10:16:33 +0200; Hi, Any ETA when it is fixed? This is really dangerous. I think nearly nobody suspects that reading block device with mounted filesystem can produce any kind of corruption. I think that there should; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00056.html (9,487 bytes)
7. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: hans@xxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 10:22:25 +0100; I have a 2.6 patch here that fixes but introduces a deadlock under load in exchance which I've started to track down, but I've been sidetracked by some othere issues. Accessing other partitions or t; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00057.html (9,653 bytes)
8. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: hristoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 15:32:45 -0400; Feizhou wrote: Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: Until a few days ago I had a very large postgresql installation on XFS. We suffered very unusual problems like corrupt tables, missing rows, corrupt indexes, an; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00323.html (9,275 bytes)
9. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: @xxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 16:04:33 -0400; XFS developers - there were a few notes about not reading from a block device with an XFS filesystem mounted (rw?). Will this interfere with lvm or device-mapper snapshots using the kernel vfs-lock p; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00325.html (8,945 bytes)
10. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: xxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 16:05:53 -0400; Is there anything in the new 2.6 bio and queueing code that could replace pagebufs entirely? That would seem ideal. Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 04:56:24PM +1000, Nathan Scott wro; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00326.html (9,325 bytes)
11. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:16:14 -0700; I was wondering about MD personally. As in, what happens when MD syncs a mirror or stripeset? Does XFS get upset? If XFS expects special treatment of its buffers, different from all other Linux files; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00330.html (8,530 bytes)
12. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: s Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 15:12:24 -0500; Jeremy Jackson wrote: Is there anything in the new 2.6 bio and queueing code that could replace pagebufs entirely? That would seem ideal. They are at a different level, bio's are a mechanism for read; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00331.html (9,590 bytes)
13. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: ощин Сергей Геннадьевич <judge@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 10:16:33 +0200; Hi, Any ETA when it is fixed? This is really dangerous. I think nearly nobody suspects that reading block device with mounted filesystem can produce any kind of corruption. I think that there should; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00342.html (9,487 bytes)
14. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: ьевич <judge@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 10:22:25 +0100; I have a 2.6 patch here that fixes but introduces a deadlock under load in exchance which I've started to track down, but I've been sidetracked by some othere issues. Accessing other partitions or t; /archives/xfs/2004-06/msg00343.html (9,653 bytes)
15. XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: Steve Wray <stevew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 13:00:14 +1200; Hi there, I'd just like to know if anyone knows of any issues with running a postgres database on an XFS filesystem in Linux? We did this a few weeks ago and the DB Admin swears that they have been s; /archives/xfs/2004-05/msg00094.html (7,938 bytes)
16. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: "Jeffrey W. Baker" <jwbaker@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 20:30:08 -0700; Until a few days ago I had a very large postgresql installation on XFS. We suffered very unusual problems like corrupt tables, missing rows, corrupt indexes, and so forth. We've never seen those prob; /archives/xfs/2004-05/msg00096.html (8,960 bytes)
17. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 14:39:41 +1000; You were running dd on the block device at the same time as using the mounted filesystem though, weren't you? Did problems persist after you stopped doing that? You didn't get back to us with any fur; /archives/xfs/2004-05/msg00097.html (9,625 bytes)
18. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 16:18:27 +1000; 'scuse my ignorance, but why in the world is it a bad thing to run dd (dd if=/devhda1 of=/dev/null) on a mounted filesystem with XFS? Regards, Nigel; /archives/xfs/2004-05/msg00098.html (9,566 bytes)
19. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 16:56:24 +1000; The way XFS manages metadata buffers is not coherent with concurrent direct block device access (the block device filesystem is expecting filesystems to be attaching buffer_heads to pages and observi; /archives/xfs/2004-05/msg00099.html (10,775 bytes)
20. Re: XFS for postgres databases? (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 13:00:47 +0100; We can use a differnt mapping, in fact that's what XFS did before 2.4.10. It's a little bit of additional code, but not a big deal. The real problem with that is that now the blockdev mapping and XFS; /archives/xfs/2004-05/msg00107.html (10,592 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]