Re: The old raw devices chestnut.

In message <407a9d5b$0$6555$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com>, Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield@dial.pipex.com> writes >"Jim Smith" <jim@jimsmith.demon.co.uk> wrote in message >news:dS4PuczgskeAFwJq@jimsmith.demon.co.uk... >> Note the cross-posting - but no flame wars please. >> >> This question was prompted by a thread on the a postgres mailing list >> during which someone (Gregory Williamson) claimed >> >> <quote> >> raw devices, at least on Solaris, are about 10 times as fast as cooked >> file systems for Informix. >> <quote> > > >2. Who cares - what matters isn't the speed of the disk read, but the >response time for the end users screens/jobs - if and only iff you can show >that this is slow and the speed is caused by a file system would you >consider RAW. I didn't really ask about IO performance, I was talking about application performance. -- Jim Smith Because of their persistent net abuse, I ignore mail from these domains (among others) .yahoo.com .hotmail.com .kr .cn .tw For an explanation see <http://www.jimsmith.demon.co.uk/spam>;