From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | John Philips <johnphilips42(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Optimizing disk throughput on quad Opteron |
Date: | 2006-10-23 22:08:33 |
Message-ID: | 20061023220833.GX26892@nasby.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 08:43:05AM -0700, John Philips wrote:
> I heard some say that the transaction log should be on
> it's own array, others say it doesn't hurt to have it
> on the same array as the OS. Is it really worthwhile
> to put it on it's own array?
It all depends on the controller and how much non-WAL workload there is.
Theoretically, with a good enough controller, you can leave WAL on the
same partition as your data.
With a complex setup like you're looking at, you really will want to do
some testing to see what makes the most sense. I can also point you at a
company that does modeling of stuff like this; they could actually give
you some idea of how well that setup would perform before you buy the
hardware.
BTW, any test results you can provide back to the community would be
most appreciated!
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-10-23 22:10:33 | Re: Best COPY Performance |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-10-23 21:59:13 | Re: Best COPY Performance |