Re: Raid 10 chunksize

From: Matthew Wakeling <matthew(at)flymine(dot)org>
To: "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Raid 10 chunksize
Date: 2009-04-01 17:01:18
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.00.0904011757580.21772@aragorn.flymine.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Stef Telford wrote:
> Good UPS, a warm PITR standby, offsite backups and regular checks is
> "good enough" for me, and really, that's what it all comes down to.
> Mitigating risk and factors into an 'acceptable' amount for each person.
> However, if you see over a 2x improvement from turning write-cache 'on'
> and have everything else in place, well, that seems like a 'no-brainer'
> to me, at least ;)

In that case, buying a battery-backed-up cache in the RAID controller
would be even more of a no-brainer.

Matthew

--
If pro is the opposite of con, what is the opposite of progress?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Scott Marlowe 2009-04-01 17:04:12 Re: Raid 10 chunksize
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2009-04-01 16:54:58 Re: Raid 10 chunksize