| From: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") |
| Date: | 2003-04-23 08:37:02 |
| Message-ID: | 200304230437.02814.darcy@druid.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday 22 April 2003 12:51, Tom Lane wrote:
> A two-disk mirror for the WAL would be good, yes; it needs redundancy
> just as much as the main storage. But the discussion was about
> performance not reliability; the OP hadn't mentioned that he wanted any
> redundant storage.
Ah. When you mentioned RAID I thought you were going after reliability. So I
am probably best in my environment to just leave everything on the RAID
device and let it do it's job as best that it can. It does seem to work
faster than using local storage, even SCSI.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at){druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Lee Kindness | 2003-04-23 08:47:06 | ECPG thread-safety |
| Previous Message | Andreas Pflug | 2003-04-23 08:30:08 | 7.4 acl: what is a*r*w*d*? |