From: | David Lang <dlang(at)invendra(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Harold <tgh(at)tgharold(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: two disks - best way to use them? |
Date: | 2005-12-06 03:54:25 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.62.0512051950560.2807@qnivq.ynat.uz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 5 Dec 2005, Thomas Harold wrote:
> Yeah, I don't think I was clear about the config. It's (4) disks setup as a
> pair of RAID1 sets. My original config was pgsql on the first RAID set (data
> and WAL). I'm now experimenting with putting the data/pg_xlog folder on the
> 2nd set of disks.
>
> Under the old setup (everything on the original RAID1 set, in a dedicated
> 32GB LVM volume), I was seeing 80-90% wait percentages in "top". My
> understanding is that this is an indicator of an overloaded / bottlenecked
> disk system. This was while doing massive inserts into a test table
> (millions of narrow rows). I'm waiting to see what happens once I have
> data/pg_xlog on the 2nd disk set.
in that case you logicly have two disks, so see the post from Ron earlier
in this thread.
David Lang
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-06 05:51:13 | Re: BLCKSZ |
Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2005-12-06 03:07:20 | Re: 15,000 tables - next step |