Re: Re: refusing connections based on load ... - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From The Hermit Hacker
Subject Re: Re: refusing connections based on load ...
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSF.4.33.0104250941000.4451-100000@mobile.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: refusing connections based on load ...  (ncm@zembu.com (Nathan Myers))
Responses tables/indexes/logs on different volumes  (ncm@zembu.com (Nathan Myers))
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Nathan Myers wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:28:17PM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > I have a Dual-866, 1gig of RAM and strip'd file systems ... this past
> > week, I've hit many times where CPU usage is 100%, RAM is 500Meg free and
> > disks are pretty much sitting idle ...
>
> Assuming "strip'd" above means "striped", it strikes me that you
> might be much better off operating the drives independently, with
> the various tables, indexes, and logs scattered each entirely on one
> drive.

have you ever tried to maintain a database doing this?  PgSQL is
definitely not designed for this sort of setup, I had symlinks goign
everywhere,a nd with the new numbering schema, this is even more difficult
to try and do :)




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [BUG?] tgconstrrelid doesn't survive a dump/restore
Next
From: Vince Vielhaber
Date:
Subject: Re: Comment about PostgreSQL on Epinions.com