Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no raid on - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no raid on
Date
Msg-id 23482.1037973168@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no raid on  (Mario Weilguni <mweilguni@sime.com>)
Responses Re: [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no raid on  ("philip johnson" <philip.johnson@atempo.com>)
Re: [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no raid on  (Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info>)
List pgsql-performance
Tree view 
Mario Weilguni <mweilguni@sime.com> writes:
> If 4 drives are an option, I suggest 2 x RAID1, one for data, and one for WAL and temporary DB space (pg_temp).

Ideally there should be *nothing* on the WAL drive except WAL; you don't
ever want that disk head seeking away from the WAL.  Put the temp files
on the data disk.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Mario Weilguni
Date:
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no raid on
Next
From: "philip johnson"
Date:
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] H/W RAID 5 on slower disks versus no raid on