Re: Multiple Storage per Tablespace, or Volumes

From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dim(at)dalibo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Multiple Storage per Tablespace, or Volumes
Date: 2007-02-19 16:27:51
Message-ID: 20070219162750.GF30737@svana.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 05:10:36PM +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> > RAID and LVM too. I can't get excited about re-inventing those wheels
> > when perfectly good implementations already exist for us to sit on top of.
>
> I though moving some knowledge about data availability into PostgreSQL code
> could provide some valuable performance benefit, allowing to organize reads
> (for example parallel tables scan/indexes scan to different volumes) and
> obtaining data from 'quicker' known volume (or least used/charged).

Well, organising requests to be handled quickly is a function of
LVM/RAID, so we don't go there. However, speeding up scans by having
multiple requests is an interesting approach, as would perhaps a
different random_page_cost for different tablespaces.

My point is, don't try to implement the mechanics of LVM/RAID into
postgres, instead, work on providing ways for users to take advantage
of these mechanisms if they have them. Look at it as if you have got
LVM/RAID setup for your ideas, how do you get postgres to take
advantage of them?

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-02-19 16:34:03 Re: pg_proc without oid?
Previous Message Guillaume Smet 2007-02-19 16:21:52 Re: WIP patch - INSERT-able log statements