| From: | Ian Westmacott <ianw(at)intellivid(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: improving write performance for logging |
| Date: | 2006-01-06 14:00:06 |
| Message-ID: | 1136556006.31602.5.camel@spectre.intellivid.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 19:08 -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 11:00:38AM -0500, Ian Westmacott wrote:
> > The WAL is a 2-spindle (SATA) RAID0 with its own controller (ext3).
> > The tables are on a 10-spindle (SCSI) RAID50 with dual U320
> > controllers (XFS). This is overkill for writing and querying the data,
> > but we need to constantly ANALYZE and VACUUM in the
> > background without interrupting the inserts (the app is 24x7). The
> > databases are 4TB, so these operations can be lengthy.
>
> How come you're using RAID50 instead of just RAID0? Or was WAL being on
> RAID0 a typo?
We use RAID50 instead of RAID0 for the tables for some fault-tolerance.
We use RAID0 for the WAL for performance.
I'm missing the implication of the question...
--
Ian Westmacott <ianw(at)intellivid(dot)com>
Intellivid Corp.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sebastian Hennebrueder | 2006-01-06 14:03:42 | Re: effizient query with jdbc |
| Previous Message | Andy | 2006-01-06 10:21:25 | Re: Improving Inner Join Performance |