| From: | ach <alanchines(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: index and data tablespaces on two separate drives or one RAID 0? |
| Date: | 2012-07-07 00:51:37 |
| Message-ID: | 1341622297080-5715780.post@n5.nabble.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> My fastest postgresql servers have everything on one raid10, using 16 or
> 20 15000 rpm SAS2 drives on a 1gb flash-backed cache controller.
Thank you - that affirms what'd been my own growing supposition, and the
plan
> why?
Really? ...Well, I mean, I'd just been going with what I'd seen asserted as
the solid baseline position: WAL should be on its own separate drive,
devoid of any interference and/or interruption other than just writing WAL.
To see that challenged is surprising; are you saying my interpretation on
that point would be incorrect, and that assumption would be wrong?
Thank you again for your feedback!
~ach
--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/index-and-data-tablespaces-on-two-separate-drives-or-one-RAID-0-tp5715724p5715780.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Steve Crawford | 2012-07-07 00:56:39 | Re: Help with sql |
| Previous Message | Rob Sargent | 2012-07-07 00:43:32 | Re: Help with sql |