Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_ctl -D?

From: Ray Stell <stellr(at)cns(dot)vt(dot)edu>
To: Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: "Tomeh, Husam" <htomeh(at)firstam(dot)com>, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl -D?
Date: 2006-10-05 13:38:42
Message-ID: 20061005133842.GD30988@cns.vt.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 03:38:04PM -0700, Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
> I have seen advice to the effect that hand partioning your database accross muliple drives many
> not produce desirable results and is a bad idea.  

Really!  Interesting.  Must stop drinking ora Koolaide.  I wonder if there are test results 
published on this?


> It seems and it is hard to balance tuple growth
> evenly across all of the drives.  

Hmmm, not sure how to accomplish this, bad or not.  Is this done with
create tablespace?  The doc shows the create tablespace directory
as singular.  How would you get a table to cross drives otherwise?
Maybe you are not refering to tuple growth in one table?

My idea (from standard ora practices) was to split table and indexes on that
table across drives with create tablespace, standard ora practice.


> Also most of your data writes are on one table, then you are
> limited to the i/o bandwidth of one drive anyway.

One table?  What table are you refering to?  Novice here...


> However, a better/safer way to relieve i/o conjestion is to move your wal-archieve directory to
> another drive. 

This would match ora dogma as well.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-10-05 14:01:50
Subject: Re: postgresql db account
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-10-05 13:35:07
Subject: Re: problems with left outer join

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group