Re: Raid 10 chunksize

From: Stef Telford <stef(at)ummon(dot)com>
To: Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>
Cc: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Raid 10 chunksize
Date: 2009-04-01 17:10:48
Message-ID: 49D3A018.7090700@ummon.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Stef Telford wrote:
>> Good UPS, a warm PITR standby, offsite backups and regular checks is
>> "good enough" for me, and really, that's what it all comes down to.
>> Mitigating risk and factors into an 'acceptable' amount for each person.
>> However, if you see over a 2x improvement from turning write-cache 'on'
>> and have everything else in place, well, that seems like a 'no-brainer'
>> to me, at least ;)
>
> In that case, buying a battery-backed-up cache in the RAID controller
> would be even more of a no-brainer.
>
> Matthew
>
Hey Matthew,
See about 3 messages ago.. We already have them (I did say UPS or
BBU, it should have been a logical 'and' instead of logical 'or' .. my
bad ;). Your right though, that was a no-brainer as well.

I am wondering how the card (3ware 9550sx) will work with SSD's, md
or lvm, blocksize, ext3 or ext4 .. but.. this is the point of
benchmarking ;)

Regards
Stef

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-04-01 17:19:10 Re: self join revisited
Previous Message Matthew Wakeling 2009-04-01 17:10:16 Re: Very specialised query