From: | Ogden <lists(at)darkstatic(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 10 Benchmarks Using bonnie++ |
Date: | 2011-08-18 14:09:30 |
Message-ID: | CB8B0873-30DF-4B37-947C-093714543F62@darkstatic.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Aug 18, 2011, at 2:07 AM, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> On 18/08/11 17:35, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> On 18/08/2011 11:48 AM, Ogden wrote:
>>> Isn't this very dangerous? I have the Dell PERC H700 card - I see that it has 512Mb Cache. Is this the same thing and good enough to switch to nobarrier? Just worried if a sudden power shut down, then data can be lost on this option.
>>>
>>>
>> Yeah, I'm confused by that too. Shouldn't a write barrier flush data to persistent storage - in this case, the RAID card's battery backed cache? Why would it force a RAID controller cache flush to disk, too?
>>
>>
>
> If the card's cache has a battery, then the cache is preserved in the advent of crash/power loss etc - provided it has enough charge, so setting 'writeback' property on arrays is safe. The PERC/SERVERRAID cards I'm familiar (LSI Megaraid rebranded models) all switch to write-though mode if they detect the battery is dangerously discharged so this is not normally a problem (but commit/fsync performance will fall off a cliff when this happens)!
>
> Cheers
>
> Mark
So a setting such as this:
Device Name : /dev/sdb
Type : SAS
Read Policy : No Read Ahead
Write Policy : Write Back
Cache Policy : Not Applicable
Stripe Element Size : 64 KB
Disk Cache Policy : Enabled
Is sufficient to enable nobarrier then with these settings?
Thank you
Ogden
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ogden | 2011-08-18 17:31:28 | Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 10 Benchmarks Using bonnie++ |
Previous Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2011-08-18 13:26:17 | Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 10 Benchmarks Using bonnie++ |