Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C50D964FD8F
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 24 Oct 2008 04:38:41 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 19309-02 for
	<pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 24 Oct 2008 04:38:38 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: delayed 00:11:48.900824 by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mo-p00-ob.rzone.de (mo-p00-ob.rzone.de [81.169.146.160])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3A364FD73
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 24 Oct 2008 04:38:37 -0300 (ADT)
X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00
X-RZG-AUTH: 
 :ICIXYUWhdf07X6m/b2XtAlrlJW5vzQNIp+WDp5lRVhY+t6aUn/IJXTddHpgCM4vhpw4=
Received: from localhost.localdomain
	(p54AABDD7.dip.t-dialin.net [84.170.189.215])
	by post.webmailer.de (fruni mo63) (RZmta 17.14)
	with ESMTP id 2002abk9O6o0VD for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:26:45 +0200 (MEST)
	(envelope-from: <l.steinborn@4c-ag.de>)
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:26:45 +0200
From: Lutz Steinborn <l.steinborn@4c-ag.de>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hardware HD choice...
Message-Id: <20081024092645.6e82eb2f.l.steinborn@4c-ag.de>
In-Reply-To: <dcc563d10810232241w445606f2wf12af9b7a7997622@mail.gmail.com>
References: <gdq44g$f4o$1@news.hub.org>
	<dcc563d10810230938n4672582bo2ec8b989f41c5430@mail.gmail.com>
	<dcc563d10810231016x2b66b7b8i5f6e7d2fb0ea0b6f@mail.gmail.com>
	<a1ec7d000810231948w1c436619h307e6ac19b88111b@mail.gmail.com>
	<dcc563d10810232241w445606f2wf12af9b7a7997622@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: 4c AG
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200810/110
X-Sequence-Number: 31691

On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 23:41:49 -0600
"Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Scott Carey <scott@richrelevance.com> wrote:
> > If you are doing batch inserts of data, and want to have reporting queries
> > concurrently running, make sure you have the pg_xlogs on a different disk
> > than the data/indexes.   2 drives RAID 1 for OS + xlogs works great (and
> 
> From the OPs original post I'd guess that one big RAID 10 would serve
> him best, but yeah, you need to test to really see.

Has anybody a performance comparison for postgresql between the various RAID
levels ?

many thanks in advance

regards