Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org>
Cc: testperf-general(at)pgfoundry(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance
Date: 2005-07-28 23:48:09
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 04:15:31PM -0700, Mark Wong wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:17:25 -0500
> "Jim C. Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 07:32:34PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > > This 4-way has 8GB of memory and four Adaptec 2200s controllers attached
> > > > to 80 spindles (eight 10-disk arrays).  For those familiar with the
> > > > schema, here is a visual of the disk layout:
> > > >
> > 
> > Have you by-chance tried it with the logs and data just going to
> > seperate RAID10s? I'm wondering if a large RAID10 would do a better job
> > of spreading the load than segmenting things to specific drives.
> No, haven't tried that.  That would reduce my number of spindles as I
> scale up. ;)  I have the disks attached as JBODs and use LVM2 to stripe
> the disks together.

I'm confused... why would it reduce the number of spindles? Is
everything just striped right now? You could always s/RAID10/RAID0/.
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant               decibel(at)decibel(dot)org 
Give your computer some brain candy! Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Mark WongDate: 2005-07-28 23:55:55
Subject: Re: [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance
Previous:From: Mark WongDate: 2005-07-28 23:16:01
Subject: Re: [Testperf-general] dbt2 & opteron performance

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group