Re: coping with failing disks

From: Joachim Worringen <joachim(dot)worringen(at)iathh(dot)de>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: coping with failing disks
Date: 2010-09-02 14:50:01
Message-ID: 4C7FB999.2060102@iathh.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Am 02.09.2010 16:32, schrieb Vick Khera:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 8:16 AM, Joachim Worringen
> <joachim(dot)worringen(at)iathh(dot)de> wrote:
>> Would the consistency of the database be affected if all indices are
>> suddenly gone?
>
> The unique constraint is implemented as a unique index. So I'd say
> "yeah, you could break your consistency".

True. But we could use a separate index space only for our own indices -
what if storage for this goes away?

> Why not purchase a robust RAM/SSD disk system designed for DB use
> rather than hacking one up on the cheap?

15k SAS drives and Intel SLC SSDs are not really on the cheap side
(especially in quantity to fill up a storage array), but we still want
to get the most of them. Things like RAMsan (Texas Memory Systems) are
currently considered overkill here. Anything else (no, not Fusion I/O)?

It's a matter of tradeoff between performance and availability.

thanks, Joachim

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Marlowe 2010-09-02 15:25:42 Re: Strange/random overload of the server
Previous Message Vick Khera 2010-09-02 14:32:18 Re: coping with failing disks