From: | Alex Turner <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Carlos Benkendorf <carlosbenkendorf(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)br> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Is RAID10 the best choice? |
Date: | 2005-12-12 04:45:51 |
Message-ID: | 33c6269f0512112045u2dfe2393y59df6a89a7a5437a@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Personaly I would split into two RAID 1s. One for pg_xlog, one for
the rest. This gives probably the best performance/reliability
combination.
Alex.
On 12/10/05, Carlos Benkendorf <carlosbenkendorf(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)br> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to know which is the best configuration to use 4 scsi drives
> with a pg 8.1 server.
>
> Configuring them as a RAID10 set seems a good choice but now I´m figuring
> another configuration:
> SCSI drive 1: operational system
> SCSI drive 2: pg_xlog
> SCSI drive 3: data
> SCSI drive 4: index
>
> I know the difference between them when you analyze risks of loosing data
> but how about performance?
>
> What should be better?
>
> Obs.: Our system uses always an index for every access..
> (enable_seqscan(false))
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Benkendorf
>
> ________________________________
> Yahoo! doce lar. Faça do Yahoo! sua homepage.
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Szabolcs BALLA | 2005-12-12 08:54:30 | 7.4.7 vs. 8.1 |
Previous Message | Mike C | 2005-12-12 02:49:10 | Re: Table Partitions / Partial Indexes |