| From: | Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Robert D Oden" <roden(at)dbasetek(dot)com>, "postgresql performance list" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Raid Configurations |
| Date: | 2007-08-23 17:13:43 |
| Message-ID: | 35FAAA5F-4130-439A-870F-D83114E75DB9@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Aug 17, 2007, at 6:55 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> So, I'd be looking at a large raid 10 and 1-2 drives for the WAL...on
> a raid 1. If your system supports two controllers (in either
> active/active or active/passive), you should look at second controller
> as well.
If you only have one controller, and it can cache writes (it has a
BBU), I'd actually lean towards putting all 12 drives into one raid
10. A good controller will be able to handle WAL fsyncs plenty fast
enough, so having a separate WAL mirror would likely hurt more than
help.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Kempter | 2007-08-23 17:16:57 | long-running query - needs tuning |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2007-08-23 17:08:22 | Re: Installing PostgreSQL |