| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Weber, Johann (ISS Kassel)" <jweber(at)iss(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Data and logs on different physical drives - advantage? |
| Date: | 2005-10-10 14:34:50 |
| Message-ID: | 20615.1128954890@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
"Weber, Johann (ISS Kassel)" <jweber(at)iss(dot)net> writes:
> Is this true for PostgreSQL (V 8.0 on ReadHat)? My tests do not show any
> speed gained when placing pg_clog and pg_xlog on a different drive.
The conventional wisdom is that it's a win to have pg_xlog on a drive by
itself. The above is not that. pg_clog is more in the nature of data,
and in any case you lose the advantage as soon as the drive handling
pg_xlog has to move the head away from the current xlog file.
Whether any particular test case would show an advantage is another
question of course. In a heavy-write scenario I would think you could
probably measure a win.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Weber, Johann (ISS Kassel) | 2005-10-10 14:40:39 | Re: Data and logs on different physical drives - advantage? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-10 14:30:37 | Re: Update - pg_dumpall money problem |