Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Francisco Reyes
Subject Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics
Date
Msg-id cone.1267565781.443763.32557.1000@shelca
Whole thread Raw
In response to 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics  (Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com>)
Responses Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics  (Scott Carey <scott@richrelevance.com>)
List pgsql-performance
david@lang.hm writes:

> With sequential scans you may be better off with the large SATA drives as
> they fit more data per track and so give great sequential read rates.

I lean more towards SAS because of writes.
One common thing we do is create temp tables.. so a typical pass may be:
* sequential scan
* create temp table with subset
* do queries against subset+join to smaller tables.

I figure the concurrent read/write would be faster on SAS than on SATA. I am
trying to move to having an external enclosure (we have several not in use
or about to become free) so I could separate the read and the write of the
temp tables.

Lastly, it is likely we are going to do horizontal partitioning (ie master
all data in one machine, replicate and then change our code to read parts of
data from different machine) and I think at that time the better drives will
do better as we have more concurrent queries.


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics
Next
From: Francisco Reyes
Date:
Subject: Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics