Re: partition question for new server setup

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Whit Armstrong <armstrong(dot)whit(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: partition question for new server setup
Date: 2009-04-28 17:56:25
Message-ID: dcc563d10904281056x1c1257b9tfe308c4e0cb3dc08@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Whit Armstrong
<armstrong(dot)whit(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks, Scott.
>
> Just to clarify you said:
>
>> postgres.  So, my pg_xlog and all OS and logging stuff goes on the
>> RAID-10 and the main store for the db goes on the RAID-10.
>
> Is that meant to be that the pg_xlog and all OS and logging stuff go
> on the RAID-1 and the real database (the
> /var/lib/postgresql/8.3/main/base directory) goes on the RAID-10
> partition?

Yeah, and extra 0 jumped in there. Faulty keyboard I guess. :) OS
and everything but base is on the RAID-1.

> This is very helpful.  Thanks for your feedback.
>
> Additionally are there any clear choices w/ regard to filesystem
> types?  Our choices would be xfs, ext3, or ext4.

Well, there's a lot of people who use xfs and ext3. XFS is generally
rated higher than ext3 both for performance and reliability. However,
we run Centos 5 in production, and XFS isn't one of the blessed file
systems it comes with, so we're running ext3. It's worked quite well
for us.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alan Hodgson 2009-04-28 18:03:25 Re: partition question for new server setup
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2009-04-28 17:53:45 pg_lock_status() performance