From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_xlog safety |
Date: | 2003-01-26 22:26:15 |
Message-ID: | 200301262226.h0QMQFl12542@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 03:43:40PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote:
>
> > So this leads me to my question: one of the tips for performance is to
> > move the pg_xlog to its own disk. Now that I have a spare disk I was
> > considering moving pg_xlog there. However, that's the only disk that
>
> Test this first. On our Sun A5200 arrays, configured using Veritas
> and RAID 1+0, I have tried several times and failed to discover a
> performance andvantage by putting the WAL on another disk or pair of
> disks. (In other configurations, the same is not the case.)
If you raid has battery-backed RAM cach in your controller, there is no
advantage to putting WAL on a separate disk --- was that the case?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Antonios Linakis | 2003-01-26 22:51:05 | postgresql 7.3.1 + readline |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-26 22:00:36 | Re: I was spoiled by the MySQL timestamp field |