From: Ragnar <gnari@hive.is>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Large Database Design Help
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 22:39:54 +0000
Message-ID: <1139611194.17929.105.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43EC69EA.3010709@logix-tt.com>
References: <43EB92DA.2080607@orangekids.org>
<43EC69EA.3010709@logix-tt.com>
On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 11:24 +0100, Markus Schaber wrote:
> For lots non-read-only database workloads, RAID5 is a performance
> killer. Raid 1/0 might be better, or having two mirrors of two disks
> each, the first mirror holding system, swap, and the PostgreSQL WAL
> files, the second one holding the data.
I was under the impression that it is preferable to keep the WAL on
its own spindles with no other activity there, to take full advantage
of the sequential nature of the WAL writes.
That would mean one mirror for the WAL, and one for the rest.
This, of course, may sometimes be too much wasted disk space, as the WAL
typically will not use a whole disk, so you might partition this mirror
into a small ext2 filesystem for WAL, and use the rest for files seldom
accessed, such as backups.
gnari
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: gnari@hive.is
Subject: Re: Large Database Design Help
In-Reply-To: <1139611194.17929.105.camel@localhost.localdomain>
* 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