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.
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 |