Re: How to allocate 8 disks

From: Matthew <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>
To: pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: How to allocate 8 disks
Date: 2008-03-03 12:11:55
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0803031206340.20402@aragorn.flymine.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Craig James wrote:
> Right, I do understand that, but reliability is not a top priority in this
> system. The database will be replicated, and can be reproduced from the raw
> data.

So what you're saying is:

1. Reliability is not important.
2. There's zero write traffic once the database is set up.

If this is true, then RAID-0 is the way to go. I think Greg's options are
good. Either:

2 discs RAID 1: OS
6 discs RAID 0: database + WAL

which is what we're using here (except with more discs), or:

8 discs RAID 10: everything

However, if reliability *really* isn't an issue, and you can accept
reinstalling the system if you lose a disc, then there's a third option:

8 discs RAID 0: Everything

Matthew

--
Heat is work, and work's a curse. All the heat in the universe, it's
going to cool down, because it can't increase, then there'll be no
more work, and there'll be perfect peace. -- Michael Flanders

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Douglas J Hunley 2008-03-03 14:25:02 which is more important? freq of checkpoints or the duration of them?
Previous Message Greg Smith 2008-03-03 05:16:44 Re: How to choose a disc array for Postgresql?