From: | Dave Crooke <dcrooke(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Karl Denninger <karl(at)denninger(dot)net> |
Cc: | Justin Graf <justin(at)magwerks(dot)com>, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: raid10 write performance |
Date: | 2010-06-22 16:01:28 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimaA0LqPAmSi--K1FkQqPXqKLpFLyhucDMI4y-w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Of course, no backup strategy is complete without testing a full restore
onto bare hardware :-)
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Karl Denninger <karl(at)denninger(dot)net> wrote:
> Justin Graf wrote:
>
> On 6/22/2010 4:31 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
>
>
> Would moving WAL dir to separate disk help potentially ?
>
>
>
> Yes it can have a big impact.
>
> WAL on a separate spindle will make a HUGE difference in performance. TPS
> rates frequently double OR BETTER with WAL on a dedicated spindle.
>
> Strongly recommended.
>
> Be aware that you must pay CLOSE ATTENTION to your backup strategy if WAL
> is on a different physical disk. Snapshotting the data disk where WAL is on
> a separate spindle and backing it up **WILL NOT WORK** and **WILL** result
> in an non-restoreable backup.
>
> The manual discusses this but it's easy to miss.... don't or you'll get a
> NASTY surprise if something goes wrong.....
>
> -- Karl
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Carey | 2010-06-22 17:19:19 | Re: raid10 write performance |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2010-06-22 14:40:31 | Re: raid10 write performance |