Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.208.211])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0AB0632A5D
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  9 Feb 2010 12:23:10 -0400 (AST)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia,
	port 10024) with ESMTP id 18066-10
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  9 Feb 2010 16:23:00 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from shrek.krogh.cc (2605ds1-ynoe.0.fullrate.dk [90.184.12.24])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25D7F636B3D
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Tue,  9 Feb 2010 12:22:59 -0400 (AST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by shrek.krogh.cc (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBC531F98F7;
	Tue,  9 Feb 2010 17:22:56 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at shrek.krogh.cc
Received: from shrek.krogh.cc ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (shrek.krogh.cc [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id bY+OE28MS65M; Tue,  9 Feb 2010 17:22:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [90.184.13.137] (unknown [90.184.13.137])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: jesper@krogh.cc)
	by shrek.krogh.cc (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D5B11F9675;
	Tue,  9 Feb 2010 17:22:52 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <4B718BDB.8080807@krogh.cc>
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:22:51 +0100
From: Jesper Krogh <jesper@krogh.cc>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it!
References: <4B71358E020000250002F0E4@gw.wicourts.gov>
In-Reply-To: <4B71358E020000250002F0E4@gw.wicourts.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.028 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=AWL=0.571,
	BAYES_00=-2.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201002/137
X-Sequence-Number: 37558

>
> Frankly, I was quite surprised by this, since some of the benchmarks
> people have published on the effects of using a separate RAID for
> the WAL files have only shown a one or two percent difference when
> using a hardware RAID controller with BBU cache configured for
> write-back.

Hi Kevin.

Nice report, but just a few questions.

Sorry if it is obvious.. but what filesystem/OS are you using and do you
 have BBU-writeback on the main data catalog also?

Jesper