From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hardware advice for scalable warehouse db
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:46:16 -0700
Message-ID: <4E208AF8.1070805@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOR=d=2W6YbY3uZJwJgCvGk9tONsKLenCsAebQazv-bNWA3QEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ivon1e$81d$1@dough.gmane.org>
<CAOR=d=2W6YbY3uZJwJgCvGk9tONsKLenCsAebQazv-bNWA3QEw@mail.gmail.com>
> Just to add to the conversation, there's no real advantage to putting
> WAL on SSD. Indexes can benefit from them, but WAL is mosty
> seqwuential throughput and for that a pair of SATA 1TB drives at
> 7200RPM work just fine for most folks.
Actually, there's a strong disadvantage to putting WAL on SSD. SSD is
very prone to fragmentation if you're doing a lot of deleting and
replacing files. I've implemented data warehouses where the database
was on SSD but WAL was still on HDD.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
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: josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: Hardware advice for scalable warehouse db
In-Reply-To: <4E208AF8.1070805@agliodbs.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