| From: | Evgeniy Shishkin <itparanoia(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Graeme B(dot) Bell" <grb(at)skogoglandskap(dot)no> |
| Cc: | Andrea Suisani <sickpig(at)opinioni(dot)net>, "mfatticcioni(at)mbigroup(dot)it" <mfatticcioni(at)mbigroup(dot)it>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Tuning the configuration |
| Date: | 2014-12-16 16:37:28 |
| Message-ID: | 63042BAB-3B28-441F-B819-B2DDC8FB24EE@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> On 16 Dec 2014, at 14:51, Graeme B. Bell <grb(at)skogoglandskap(dot)no> wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't understand the logic behind using drives,
>> which are best for random io, for sequent io workloads.
>
> Because they are also best for sequential IO. I get 1.3-1.4GB/second from 4 SSDs in RAID or >500MB/s for single disk systems, even with cheap models.
> Are you getting more than that from high-end spinning rust?
I better use ssd for random iops when database doesn't fit in ram.
For wal logs i use raid with bbu cache and couple of sas drives.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Strahinja Kustudić | 2014-12-16 19:46:05 | Re: 8xIntel S3500 SSD in RAID10 on Dell H710p |
| Previous Message | Graeme B. Bell | 2014-12-16 11:51:19 | Re: Tuning the configuration |