From: | Christiaan Willemsen <cwillemsen(at)technocon(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: How to setup disk spindles for best performance |
Date: | 2008-08-21 08:34:19 |
Message-ID: | 48AD288B.8030902@technocon.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Thanks Joshua,
So what about putting the indexes on a separate array? Since we do a lot
of inserts indexes are going to be worked on a lot of the time.
Regards,
Christiaan
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Christiaan Willemsen wrote:
>> So, what you are basically saying, is that a single mirror is in
>> general more than enough to facilitate the transaction log.
>
> http://www.commandprompt.com/blogs/joshua_drake/2008/04/is_that_performance_i_smell_ext2_vs_ext3_on_50_spindles_testing_for_postgresql/
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/HP_ProLiant_DL380_G5_Tuning_Guide
>
> And to answer your question, yes. Transaction logs are written
> sequentially. You do not need a journaled file system and raid 1 is
> plenty for most if not all work loads.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | André Volpato | 2008-08-21 13:53:33 | Re: Postgres not using array |
Previous Message | Moritz Onken | 2008-08-21 07:45:32 | Re: Slow query with a lot of data |