Re: [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no raid on

pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org wrote:
> Objet : Re: [PERFORM] [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no
> raid on
>
>
> Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com> writes:
>> If 4 drives are an option, I suggest 2 x RAID1, one for data, and
>> one for WAL and temporary DB space (pg_temp).
>
> Ideally there should be *nothing* on the WAL drive except WAL; you
> don't ever want that disk head seeking away from the WAL. Put the
> temp files on the data disk.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the
> postmaster

which temp files ?