From: Ian Westmacott <ianw@intellivid.com>
To: Jim C. Nasby <jnasby@pervasive.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: improving write performance for logging
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 09:00:06 -0500
Message-ID: <1136556006.31602.5.camel@spectre.intellivid.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060106010822.GK43311@pervasive.com>
References: <43BB0C5C.8020207@computer.org>
<1136382865.24450.7.camel@spectre.intellivid.com>
<7.0.1.0.2.20060104092139.01c37da0@earthlink.net>
<1136390438.24450.49.camel@spectre.intellivid.com>
<20060106010822.GK43311@pervasive.com>
On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 19:08 -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 11:00:38AM -0500, Ian Westmacott wrote:
> > The WAL is a 2-spindle (SATA) RAID0 with its own controller (ext3).
> > The tables are on a 10-spindle (SCSI) RAID50 with dual U320
> > controllers (XFS). This is overkill for writing and querying the data,
> > but we need to constantly ANALYZE and VACUUM in the
> > background without interrupting the inserts (the app is 24x7). The
> > databases are 4TB, so these operations can be lengthy.
>
> How come you're using RAID50 instead of just RAID0? Or was WAL being on
> RAID0 a typo?
We use RAID50 instead of RAID0 for the tables for some fault-tolerance.
We use RAID0 for the WAL for performance.
I'm missing the implication of the question...
--
Ian Westmacott <ianw@intellivid.com>
Intellivid Corp.
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: ianw@intellivid.com, jnasby@pervasive.com
Subject: Re: improving write performance for logging
In-Reply-To: <1136556006.31602.5.camel@spectre.intellivid.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