Re: Choosing a filesystem

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Matthew Wakeling" <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>, "Kenneth Marshall" <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Choosing a filesystem
Date: 2008-09-11 17:30:16
Message-ID: 48C90F58.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>>> Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 06:18:37PM +0100, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Laszlo Nagy wrote:
>>> So the basic system will reside on a RAID 1 array, created from two
SAS
>>> disks spinning at 15 000 rpm. I will buy 10 pieces of Seagate
Barracuda
>>> 320GB SATA (ES 7200) disks for the rest.
>>
>> That sounds good. Put RAID 1 on the pair, and RAID 1+0 on the rest.
It'll
>> be pretty good. Put the OS and the WAL on the pair, and the database
on the
>> large array.
>>
>> However, one of the biggest things that will improve your
performance
>> (especially in OLTP) is to use a proper RAID controller with a
>> battery-backed-up cache.
>
> But remember that putting the WAL on a separate drive(set) will only
> help if you do not have competing I/O, such as system logging or
paging,
> going to the same drives. This turns your fast sequential I/O into
> random I/O with the accompaning 10x or more performance decrease.

Unless you have a good RAID controller with battery-backed-up cache.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laszlo Nagy 2008-09-11 17:47:41 Re: Choosing a filesystem
Previous Message Kenneth Marshall 2008-09-11 17:23:32 Re: Choosing a filesystem