From: Steve Crawford <scrawford@pinpointresearch.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: BBU Cache vs. spindles
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 16:38:04 -0700
Message-ID: <4CAE59DC.4060407@pinpointresearch.com> (raw)
I'm weighing options for a new server. In addition to PostgreSQL, this
machine will handle some modest Samba and Rsync load.
I will have enough RAM so the virtually all disk-read activity will be
cached. The average PostgreSQL read activity will be modest - a mix of
single-record and fairly large (reporting) result-sets. Writes will be
modest as well but will come in brief (1-5 second) bursts of individual
inserts. The rate of insert requests will hit 100-200/second for those
brief bursts.
So...
Am I likely to be better off putting $$$ toward battery-backup on the
RAID or toward adding a second RAID-set and splitting off the WAL
traffic? Or something else?
Cheers,
Steve
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: scrawford@pinpointresearch.com
Subject: Re: BBU Cache vs. spindles
In-Reply-To: <4CAE59DC.4060407@pinpointresearch.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