Re: 3 x PostgreSQL in cluster/redunant - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: 3 x PostgreSQL in cluster/redunant
Date
Msg-id 437A3FBC.5050905@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 3 x PostgreSQL in cluster/redunant  (Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de>)
Responses Re: 3 x PostgreSQL in cluster/redunant  (Trent Shipley <tshipley@deru.com>)
Re: 3 x PostgreSQL in cluster/redunant  (Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de>)
List pgsql-general
Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2005-11-14 16:54:41, schrieb Jim C. Nasby:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 07:36:44PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
>>
>>> Hello *,
>>>
>>> I have three Sun Server where I have reserved on each Server a Raid-5
>>> of 1 TByte for my PostgreSQL.  The first PostgreSQL is up and running
>>> with a database of 150 GByte.
>>>
>> Keep in mind that databases and RAID5 generally don't mix very well.
>>
>
> Can you explain me why?
>
RAID 5 is very expensive for writes.

> Unfortunatly the Controllers in the three SUN-Servers do not support
> 300 GByte SCSI-Drives, so I have to continue with the Raid-5 of 16x
> 76 GByte.
>
Could you do RAID 10?

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Kris Jurka
Date:
Subject: Re: PREPARE TRANSACTION and webapps
Next
From: Kris Jurka
Date:
Subject: Re: lo_import()