Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>:
>> Bill Moran wrote:
>>> I'm fairly sure that FreeBSD's GEOM does. Of course, it couldn't be doing
>>> consistency checking at that point.
>> According to this:
>> There is a -b (balance) option that seems pretty clear that it does not
>> read from all drives if it does not have to:
> >From where did you draw that conclusion? Note that the "split" algorithm
> (which is the default) divides requests up among multiple drives. I'm
> unclear as to how you reached a conclusion opposite of what the man page
> says -- did you test and find it not to work?
Perhaps you and I are speaking slightly different languages? :-) When I
say "does not read from all drives", I mean "it will happily read from
any of the drives to satisfy the request, and allows some level of
configuration as to which drive it will select. It does not need to read
all of the drives to satisfy the request."
Mark Mielke <mark(at)mielke(dot)cc>
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Greg Smith||Date: 2007-12-27 15:53:43|
|Subject: Re: More shared buffers causes lower performances|
|Previous:||From: Jared Mauch||Date: 2007-12-27 14:58:43|
|Subject: Re: pg_dump performance|