On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 11:23 am, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > Along those lines, is there anything else that would benefit from being
> > moved? pg_clog and pg_subtrans come to mind; but maybe pg_multixact and
> > pg_twophase are candidates as well?
>
> pgsql_tmp
Does anyone have any recommendations about which of these would contend with
each other for disk IO? I'm looking to put together a doco addition about
multi-disk setup, so far I have something like:
/mnt/pg_base
/mnt/pg_xlog
/mnt/pg_tab1
/mnt/pg_idx1
...but is there significant gain in moving other bits from pg_base to a
different spindle? If so, what can be safely combined, and what would
definitely cause contention?
I know that the answer would vary for different types of DB activity, but any
"rough guides" would be a handy place to start.
Regards, Philip.
--
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
-----------------
Utiba Pty Ltd
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is
believed to be clean.
