From: | Klaus Ita <klaus(at)worstofall(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BBU still needed with SSD? |
Date: | 2011-07-21 07:19:45 |
Message-ID: | CAGrfkYOT9iUofFMrmBcxtHtgLxsDUa2W8FgCFW5pQ=GBaiy9fg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Have you also created your partitions with a reasonably new fdisk (or
equivalent) with -c -u as options?
Your partitions should be starting somewhere at 2048 i guess (let the
sw figure that out). The fast degradation of the one disk might
indicate bad partitioning? (maybe recheck with a grml.iso or something
alike http://www.grml.org/ )
Also, ... did you know that any unused space in the disk is being used
as bad block 'replacement'? so just leave out 1-2 GB space at the end
of your disk to make use of this 'feature'
otherwise, mdadm supports raid1 with more than 2 drives. I havent seen
this configuration much but it makes absolute sense on drives where
you expect failure. (i am not speaking spare, but really raid1 with >
2 drives).
I like this setup, with ssd drives it might be the solution to decay.
regs,
klaus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2011-07-21 11:16:24 | Intel 320 series drives firmware bug |
Previous Message | Andrzej Nakonieczny | 2011-07-20 19:33:53 | Re: Large rows number, and large objects |