From: | Brian Modra <brian(at)zwartberg(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: RAID for the DB filesystem |
Date: | 2009-08-04 08:12:46 |
Message-ID: | 5a9699850908040112g60c96885n24c375edb480affa@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
2009/8/3 Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Brian Modra<brian(at)zwartberg(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > my database is hit with constant inserts to 6 main tables (200 inserts
> > per minute to one of the tables, less to the others), some updates,
> > but then the selects:
> > - large retrievals of randomly different sections of the database
> > (indexed maps by postgis). This data is static.
> > - medium sized retrievals of the same tables that are receiving the
> > inserts. By mediou sized, I mean typically 200 rows at once. These
> > retrievals are also randomly different to each other, and typically
> > retrieving the newly inserted data rather than the more historical.
> > The database size is about 300GB and growing.
> >
> > What sort of hardware config would you advise?
> > I'm thinking of 2x300GB SATA RAID 0 for the OS and application files,
>
> Is there a valid reason you're NOT considering RAID-1 here? I hope
> RAID-0 is a typo.
It was an error. I wanted mirroring. But... on second thoughts, is
there really a good reason for using a second set of disks for the OS?
Once the database is running, its surely not going to be using the OS
disk much, so why not just make a big RAID 10 array and use that for
both OS and DB... partition it as usual I mean - boot, root. Should I
use another disk for swap... for that matter, do I need swap at all...
RAM with be at least 16GB?
>
> > and 6x300GB SAS RAID 10 for the database... but some experts have said
> > RAID 5 is fine. I'm inlined to think RAID 10, but I'm not an expert.
> > Your advice will be much appreciated.
>
> Then I question the expertise of your experts. RAID5 is not fine.
> It's slow, more prone to loss due to drive loss, and generally not a
> good choice for databases.
>
> I would gladly have more SATA drives in a RAID-10 than fewer SAS
> drives in a RAID-5.
>
> if someone is worried about "wasting" disk space tell them to worry
> about something else, like losing data.
--
Brian Modra Land line: +27 23 5411 462
Mobile: +27 79 69 77 082
5 Jan Louw Str, Prince Albert, 6930
Postal: P.O. Box 2, Prince Albert 6930
South Africa
http://www.zwartberg.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Venkateswara Rao Bondada | 2009-08-04 08:14:25 | Re: Create table command fails with permission denied |
Previous Message | Plugge, Joe R. | 2009-08-03 23:19:55 | Slony-I Version 2.0.3RC with Postgres 8.4.0 |