From: Jim C. Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
To: John Philips <johnphilips42@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Optimizing disk throughput on quad Opteron
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 17:08:33 -0500
Message-ID: <20061023220833.GX26892@nasby.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061021154305.48104.qmail@web57806.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <20061021154305.48104.qmail@web57806.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 08:43:05AM -0700, John Philips wrote:
> I heard some say that the transaction log should be on
> it's own array, others say it doesn't hurt to have it
> on the same array as the OS. Is it really worthwhile
> to put it on it's own array?
It all depends on the controller and how much non-WAL workload there is.
Theoretically, with a good enough controller, you can leave WAL on the
same partition as your data.
With a complex setup like you're looking at, you really will want to do
some testing to see what makes the most sense. I can also point you at a
company that does modeling of stuff like this; they could actually give
you some idea of how well that setup would perform before you buy the
hardware.
BTW, any test results you can provide back to the community would be
most appreciated!
--
Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
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: jim@nasby.net, johnphilips42@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Optimizing disk throughput on quad Opteron
In-Reply-To: <20061023220833.GX26892@nasby.net>
* 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