On Saturday 03 May 2003 13:27, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> On Friday 02 May 2003 16:10, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > More disks is almost always better. Putting WAL on a seperate (non-RAID)
> > disk is usually a very good idea.
> From a performance POV perhaps. The subject came up on hackers recently
> and it was pointed out that if you use RAID for reliability and redundancy
> rather than for performance, you need to keep the WAL files on the RAID
but for performance reason, that RAID can be separate from the data RAID..:-)
"Gee, Toto, I don't think we are in Kansas anymore."
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Christopher Kings-Lynne||Date: 2003-05-03 10:04:22|
|Subject: Re: looking for large dataset|
|Previous:||From: Shridhar Daithankar||Date: 2003-05-03 08:02:49|
|Subject: Re: Looking for a cheap upgrade (RAID)|