From: PFC <lists@boutiquenumerique.com>
To: mudfoot@rawbw.com
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Multiple disks: RAID 5 or PG Cluster
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 18:00:14 +0200
Message-ID: <op.sskpeoazth1vuj@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1119040721.42b334d1c3ec9@webmail.rawbw.com>
References: <7a1914222f313b7c5e88bedb8a662f12@implements.be>
<1119040721.42b334d1c3ec9@webmail.rawbw.com>
> I do not know what clustering would do for you. But striping will
> provide a
> high level of assurance that each of your hard drives will process
> equivalent
> amounts of IO operations.
I don't know what I'm talking about, but wouldn't mirorring be faster
than striping for random reads like you often get on a database ? (ie. the
reads can be dispatched to any disk) ? (or course, not for writes, but if
you won't use fsync, random writes should be reduced no ?)
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: lists@boutiquenumerique.com, mudfoot@rawbw.com
Subject: Re: Multiple disks: RAID 5 or PG Cluster
In-Reply-To: <op.sskpeoazth1vuj@localhost>
* 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