From: | Dave Crooke <dcrooke(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | sergey <sergey(dot)on(dot)net(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: choosing the right RAID level for PostgresQL database |
Date: | 2011-02-14 01:54:11 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=RgQyxcj=hg_AddNNOr5=mSEcqvhj8s=qhznwx@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
For any database, anywhere, the answer is pretty much always RAID-10.
The only time you would do anything else is for odd special cases.
Cheers
Dave
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 2:12 PM, sergey <sergey(dot)on(dot)net(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I got a disk array appliance of 8 disks 1T each (UltraStor RS8IP4). It will
> be used solely by PostgresQL database and I am trying to choose the best
> RAID level for it.
>
> The most priority is for read performance since we operate large data sets
> (tables, indexes) and we do lots of searches/scans, joins and nested
> queries. With the old disks that we have now the most slowdowns happen on
> SELECTs.
>
> Fault tolerance is less important, it can be 1 or 2 disks.
>
> Space is the least important factor. Even 1T will be enough.
>
> Which RAID level would you recommend in this situation. The current options
> are 60, 50 and 10, but probably other options can be even better.
>
> Thank you!
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2011-02-14 02:12:36 | Re: comparison of 8.3.10 to 8.3.14 reveals unexpected difference in explain plan |
Previous Message | Mark Rostron | 2011-02-14 01:29:51 | comparison of 8.3.10 to 8.3.14 reveals unexpected difference in explain plan |