From: Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma@yahoo.com>
To: Sven Geisler <sgeisler@aeccom.com>
To: hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@gmail.com>
Cc: Pgsql-Performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: how to partition disks
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 07:23:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20060614142344.13558.qmail@web31804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <448FF5EB.8010808@aeccom.com>
> > raid 10 is of course not questionable. but are you sure that it will
> > work faster than for example:
> > 2 discs (raid 1) for xlog
> > 6 discs (raid 10) for tables
> > 6 discs (raid 10) for indices?
> >
>
> This depends on your application. Do you have a lot of disc reads?
> Anyhow, I would put the xlog always to a RAID 10 volume because most of
> the I/O for update and inserts is going to the xlog.
>
> 4 discs xlog
> 6 discs tables
> 4 discs tables2
I have a question in regards to I/O bandwidths of various raid configuration. Primary, does the
above suggested raid partitions imply that multiple (smaller) disk arrays have a potential for
more I/O bandwidth than a larger raid 10 array?
Regards,
Richard
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: rabroersma@yahoo.com, sgeisler@aeccom.com, depesz@gmail.com
Subject: Re: how to partition disks
In-Reply-To: <20060614142344.13558.qmail@web31804.mail.mud.yahoo.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