From: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
To: Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
Cc: postgresql performance list <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: best use of an EMC SAN
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:05:37 +0100
Message-ID: <877ip7avda.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D02C9DBC-0127-4B62-ABE3-93646B6A3F9F@fastcrypt.com>
References: <D02C9DBC-0127-4B62-ABE3-93646B6A3F9F@fastcrypt.com>
"Dave Cramer" <pg@fastcrypt.com> writes:
> Assuming we have 24 73G drives is it better to make one big metalun and carve
> it up and let the SAN manage the where everything is, or is it better to
> specify which spindles are where.
This is quite a controversial question with proponents of both strategies.
I would suggest having one RAID-1 array for the WAL and throw the rest of the
drives at a single big array for the data files. That wastes space since the
WAL isn't big but the benefit is big.
If you have a battery backed cache you might not need even that. Just throwing
them all into a big raid might work just as well.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.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: stark@enterprisedb.com, pg@fastcrypt.com
Subject: Re: best use of an EMC SAN
In-Reply-To: <877ip7avda.fsf@oxford.xeocode.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