From: | Matthew <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
Cc: | David Brain <dbrain(at)bandwidth(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 1 or 2 servers for large DB scenario. |
Date: | 2008-01-25 17:00:01 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.64.0801251657530.4642@aragorn.flymine.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Greg Smith wrote:
> If you're seeing <100TPS you should consider if it's because you're limited
> by how fast WAL commits can make it to disk. If you really want good insert
> performance, there is no substitute for getting a disk controller with a good
> battery-backed cache to work around that. You could just put the WAL xlog
> directory on a RAID-1 pair of disks to accelerate that, you don't have to
> move the whole database to a new controller.
Hey, you *just* beat me to it.
Yes, that's quite right. My suggestion was to move the whole thing, but
Greg is correct - you only need to put the WAL on a cached disc system.
That'd be quite a bit cheaper, I'd imagine.
Another case of that small SSD drive being useful, I think.
Matthew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tory M Blue | 2008-01-25 17:36:18 | Re: Postgres 8.2 memory weirdness |
Previous Message | Matthew | 2008-01-25 16:56:24 | Re: 1 or 2 servers for large DB scenario. |