Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A3C06501F5 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2008 14:51:36 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 86098-01 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2008 14:51:30 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.236]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B1E664FCDF for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2008 14:51:31 -0300 (ADT) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so2708511rvf.43 for ; Mon, 01 Sep 2008 10:51:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=vdgar8oEEAYpYHiuQqwjTsCh6MAqHO/bZ6aw2U6uZ5w=; b=w0HO6tVYgwyj4j0SvXWzGJRsnK59FUNOL6ij1EY8Kw6nlIpz7D67MnCX0TBcE0cBrr detuY5ionPDU4eE1jkd/b034HsdZNZhhL7CARaeDhY86InBrRpG1sOdE64E8slXPAIqp PqoLVnX5pQTOP2nVMJDh5XeIlS3NN+4WIr8hk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=bj5yQQdslh6t1EmzZA/TNHvj/t8mLs/SqyW7ii2UOqwVBanC9N4nlrN3zwkCel2X5l eArZD6DDDsYUAHHe+wmgNdVjA6scCjG/AR7JTbRHDw5qSSO9eWTwTEM7dsAgXEQGSSXR uCrsMLW/2mxAJIWUDp7b1ex25/4hlcrS624ZA= Received: by 10.140.136.5 with SMTP id j5mr3624055rvd.27.1220291490625; Mon, 01 Sep 2008 10:51:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.248.12 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Sep 2008 10:51:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 11:51:30 -0600 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Thomas Finneid" Subject: Re: slow update of index during insert/copy Cc: "Craig Ringer" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <48BBD22E.4090308@ifi.uio.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48BA9D65.2020001@ifi.uio.no> <48BB4A2D.9080404@postnewspapers.com.au> <48BBD22E.4090308@ifi.uio.no> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200809/10 X-Sequence-Number: 31323 On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 5:29 AM, Thomas Finneid wrote: > It does have a sata raid controller, but not have the battery pack, because > its a develmachine and not a production machine, I thought it was not > needed. But if you are saying the battery pack enables a cache which enables > faster disk writes I will consider it. > Its the first time I have worked with a raid controller, so I suspect I have > to read up on the features to understand how to utilise it best. The model of the controller will have a large impact on performance as well. The latest fastest RAID controllers have dual core 1.2GHz CPUs on them, where some slower ones still in produciton are using 333MHz single core CPUs. The quality of the firmware, the linux driver (or windows, or bsd) all have a large impact on the performance of a raid controller. Definitely look into the battery backing unit. But if it's a $250 card, then it might not be enough.