Re: Threaded Sorting

Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> scott.marlowe wrote:
<snip>
> > It seems like sometimes we consider these issues more from the one or two
> > SCSI drives perspective insted of the big box o drives perspective.
>
> Yes, it is mostly for non-RAID drives, but also, sometimes single drives
> can be faster. When you have a drive array, it isn't as easy to hit
> each drive and keep it running sequentially. Of course, I don't have
> any hard numbers on that. ;-)

Arrghh... please remember that "big bunch of drives" != "all in one
array".

It's common to have a bunch of drives and allocate different ones for
different tasks appropriately, whether in array sets, individually,
mirrored, etc.

100% totally feasible to have a separate 15k SCSI drive or two just
purely for doing sorts if it would assist in throughput.

:-)

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
> + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org

--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi