From: Jeremy Haile <jhaile@fastmail.fm>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: opinion on disk speed
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 09:15:25 -0500
Message-ID: <1134137725.8767.249418727@webmail.messagingengine.com> (raw)
> one other note, you probably don't want to use all the disks in a raid10
> array, you probably want to split a pair of them off into a seperate
> raid1 array and put your WAL on it.
Is a RAID 1 array of two disks sufficient for WAL? What's a typical
setup for a high performance PostgreSQL installation? RAID 1 for WAL
and RAID 10 for data?
I've read that splitting the WAL and data offers huge performance
benefits. How much additional benefit is gained by moving indexes to
another RAID array? Would you typically set the indexes RAID array up
as RAID 1 or 10?
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: jhaile@fastmail.fm
Subject: Re: opinion on disk speed
In-Reply-To: <1134137725.8767.249418727@webmail.messagingengine.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox