From: | Tobias Brox <tobias(at)nordicbet(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
Cc: | Tobias Brox <tobias(at)nordicbet(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Swappiness setting on a linux pg server |
Date: | 2006-10-20 12:18:57 |
Message-ID: | 20061020121857.GA11885@oppetid.no |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
[Jim C. Nasby - Thu at 11:31:26AM -0500]
> The issue with pg_xlog is you don't need bandwidth... you need super-low
> latency. The best way to accomplish that is to get a battery-backed RAID
> controller that you can enable write caching on. In fact, if the
> controller is good enough, you can theoretically get away with just
> building one big RAID10 and letting the controller provide the
> low-latency fsyncs that pg_xlog depends on.
I was talking a bit about our system administrator. We're running 4
disks in raid 1+0 for the database and 2 disks in raid 1 for the WALs
and for OS. He wasn't really sure if we had write cacheing on the RAID
controller or not. He pasted me some lines from the dmesg:
sda: asking for cache data failed
sda: assuming drive cache: write through
failed line is expected from these controllers
0000:02:0e.0 RAID bus controller: Dell PowerEdge Expandable RAID controller 4 (rev 06)
I think we're going to move system logs, temporary files and backup
files from the wal-disks to the db-disks. Since our database aren't on
fire for the moment, I suppose we'll wait moving the rest of the OS :-)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Boreham | 2006-10-20 14:33:05 | Re: measuring shared memory usage on Windows |
Previous Message | Markus Schaber | 2006-10-20 11:46:12 | Re: VACUUM FULL ANALYZE on 8.1.4 is slower then on 8.0 |