Re: Tuning Tips for a new Server

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>
Cc: Ogden <lists(at)darkstatic(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Tuning Tips for a new Server
Date: 2011-08-17 19:14:26
Message-ID: CAOR=d=0NAmTbYE1epENHiP0UjbivpPvzwC2z951YQBuja86z2Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> wrote:
>
> I think you've mentioned the database is on 6 drives, while the other
> volume is on 2 drives, right? That makes the OS drive about 3x slower
> (just a rough estimate). But if the database drive is used heavily, it
> might help to move the xlog directory to the OS disk. See how is the db
> volume utilized and if it's fully utilized, try to move the xlog
> directory.
>
> The only way to find out is to actualy try it with your workload.

This is a very important point. I've found on most machines with
hardware caching RAID and 8 or fewer 15k SCSI drives it's just as
fast to put it all on one big RAID-10 and if necessary partition it to
put the pg_xlog on its own file system. After that depending on the
workload you might need a LOT of drives in the pg_xlog dir or just a
pair. Under normal ops many dbs will use only a tiny % of a
dedicated pg_xlog. Then something like a site indexer starts to run,
and writing heavily to the db, and the usage shoots to 100% and it's
the bottleneck.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message J Sisson 2011-08-17 19:16:11 Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 10 Benchmarks Using bonnie++
Previous Message Andy Colson 2011-08-17 19:13:00 Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 10 Benchmarks Using bonnie++