| From: | Fernando Hevia <fhevia(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Postgres <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Rene Romero Benavides <rene(dot)romero(dot)b(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN) |
| Date: | 2013-08-28 02:36:40 |
| Message-ID: | CAGYT1XQtgNj=otOSfgtN7gp-zT9uJPqHj2spZYb36V+LeP1EJw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
In your case I'd go for the 3 disk raid 0 setup.
El ago 27, 2013 11:25 p.m., "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
escribió:
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Rene Romero Benavides
> <rene(dot)romero(dot)b(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > First of all, thank you so much for your valuable time.
> >
> > It probably does, though we have a requirement of having available at
least
> > twice the expected database size, and 50% of disk space overhead sounds
like
> > too much for us to take in a replicated SAN environment and a PostgreSQL
> > master/slave - streaming replication setup.
> >
> > our options regarding disks availability at the moment are:
> > a 3 disks array dedicated for PostgreSQL in any RAID configuration we'd
> > like
> > OR
> > a 10 disks array shared with 14 virtual machines running the middleware
> > layer and the application infrastructure in a RAID 5 configuration
In your case I'd go for the 3 disk raid 0 setup. Be sure to have your
failover scripts tested.
Regards,
Fernando
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dana Rea | 2013-08-28 13:50:41 | Removal of $PGDATA/base files that existed before streaming replication (v9.2.4) |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2013-08-28 02:24:44 | Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN) |