From: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
To: cluster <skrald@amossen.dk>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Best hardware/cost tradoff?
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 16:03:24 -0600
Message-ID: <dcc563d10808281503w1c58ce4ex211e838cc239087c@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <g975b3$5gv$1@news.hub.org>
References: <g96ttt$2l3m$1@news.hub.org>
<064701c90949$51d117d0$8f01010a@iptel.com.ar>
<48B709A5.3090906@emolecules.com>
<g975b3$5gv$1@news.hub.org>
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 3:29 PM, cluster <skrald@amossen.dk> wrote:
> Thanks for all your replies! They are enlightening. I have some additional
> questions:
>
> 1) Would you prefer
> a) 5.4k 2" SATA RAID10 on four disks or
> b) 10k 2" SAS RAID1 on two disks?
> (Remember the lots (!) of random reads)
I'd lean towards 4 disks in RAID-10. Better performance when > 1 read
is going on. Similar commit rates to the two 10k drives. Probably
bigger drives too, right? Always nice to have room to work in.
> 2) Should I just make one large partition of my RAID? Does it matter at all?
Probably. With more disks it might be advantageous to split out two
drives into RAID-10 for pg_xlog. with 2 or 4 disks, splitting off two
for pg_xlog might slow down the data partition more than you gain from
a separate pg_xlog drive set.
> 3) Will I gain much by putting the OS on a saparate disk, not included in
> the RAID? (The webserver and database would still share the RAID - but I
> guess the OS will cache my (small) web content in RAM anyway).
The real reason you want your OS on a different set of drives is that
it allows you to reconfigure your underlying RAID array as needed
without having to reinstall the whole OS again. Yeah, logging to
/var/log will eat some bandwidth on your RAID as well, but the ease of
maintenance is why I do it as much as anything. A lot of large
servers support 2 fixed drives for the OS and a lot of removeable
drives hooked up to a RAID controller for this reason.
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: scott.marlowe@gmail.com, skrald@amossen.dk
Subject: Re: Best hardware/cost tradoff?
In-Reply-To: <dcc563d10808281503w1c58ce4ex211e838cc239087c@mail.gmail.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