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

Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks

From: Luke Lonergan <LLonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
To: "david(at)lang(dot)hm" <david(at)lang(dot)hm>, "glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk"<glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net" <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>, "scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com"<scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org"<pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks
Date: 2009-01-11 23:16:21
Message-ID: 2106D8DC89010842BABA5CD03FEA406168A731D3@EXVMBX018-10.exch018.msoutlookonline.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Not to mention the #1 cause of server faults in my experience: OS kernel bug causes a crash.  Battery backup doesn't help you much there.

Fsync of log is necessary IMO.

That said, you could use a replication/backup strategy to get a consistent snapshot in the past if you don't mind losing some data or can recreate it from backup elsewhere.

I think a strategy that puts the WAL on an SLC SSD is a very good one as of Jan/09 and will get much better in short order.

- Luke

----- Original Message -----
From: pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org <pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Glyn Astill <glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: Ron <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>; Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>; pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Sun Jan 11 15:35:22 2009
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks

On Sun, 11 Jan 2009, Glyn Astill wrote:

> --- On Sun, 11/1/09, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> They also told me we could never lose power in the hosting
>> center
>> because it was so wonder and redundant and that I was
>> wasting my time.
>
> We'll that's just plain silly, at the very least there's always going to
> be some breakers / fuzes in between the power and the machines.
>
> In fact in our building there's quite a few breaker points between our
> comms room on the 3rd floor and the ups / generator in the basement.
> It's a crappy implementation actually.

the response I get from people is that they give their servers redundant
poewr supplies and put them on seperate circuits so they must be safe from
that.

but as commented, that's not enough in the real world.

David Lang

--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: M. Edward (Ed) BoraskyDate: 2009-01-11 23:28:09
Subject: Re: block device benchmarking
Previous:From: Glyn AstillDate: 2009-01-11 20:59:58
Subject: Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks

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