pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim C. Nasby <jnasby@pervasive.com>
To: Luke Lonergan <llonergan@greenplum.com>
Cc: Mike Biamonte <mike@dbeat.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Huge Data sets, simple queries
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:21:45 -0600
Message-ID: <20060131192145.GU95850@pervasive.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C004D7AE.1B5A7%llonergan@greenplum.com>
References: <20060130202524.GB3920@pervasive.com>
	<C004D7AE.1B5A7%llonergan@greenplum.com>

On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 09:00:30AM -0800, Luke Lonergan wrote:
> Jim,
> 
> On 1/30/06 12:25 PM, "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com> wrote:
> 
> > Why divide by 2? A good raid controller should be able to send read
> > requests to both drives out of the mirrored set to fully utilize the
> > bandwidth. Of course, that probably won't come into play unless the OS
> > decides that it's going to read-ahead fairly large chunks of the table
> > at a time...
> 
> I've not seen one that does, nor would it work in the general case IMO.  In
> RAID1 writes are duplicated and reads come from one of the copies.  You
> could alternate read service requests to minimize rotational latency, but
> you can't improve bandwidth.

(BTW, I did some testing that seems to confirm this)

Why couldn't you double the bandwidth? If you're doing a largish read
you should be able to do something like have drive a read the first
track, drive b the second, etc. Of course that means that the controller
or OS would have to be able to stitch things back together.

As for software raid, I'm wondering how well that works if you can't use
a BBU to allow write caching/re-ordering...
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461



view thread (41+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20060131192145.GU95850@pervasive.com>
Permalink:  ../20060131192145.GU95850@pervasive.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20060131192145.GU95850@pervasive.com

 · 

reply

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: jnasby@pervasive.com, llonergan@greenplum.com, mike@dbeat.com
  Subject: Re: Huge Data sets, simple queries
  In-Reply-To: <20060131192145.GU95850@pervasive.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