I was curious to see how postgres would perform with wal on a tmpfs vs disk here are some numbers I got from pgbench. Let me know if I did something stupid, this is the first time I've used pgbench. The wal on tmpfs method is not significantly faster.
[[ WAL ON TMPFS ]] pgbench -i -s 10 -U postgres -d benchmark ... pgbench -Upostgres -s 10 -c 10 -t 10000 benchmark starting vacuum...end. transaction type: TPC-B (sort of) scaling factor: 10 number of clients: 10 number of transactions per client: 10000 number of transactions actually processed: 100000/100000 tps = 5817.693724 (including connections establishing) tps = 5825.646441 (excluding connections establishing) [[ WAL ON EXT2 14 U320 DRIVE RAID10 WITH BBU (same as data) ]] pgbench -Upostgres -s 10 -c 10 -t 10000 benchmark starting vacuum...end. transaction type: TPC-B (sort of) scaling factor: 10 number of clients: 10 number of transactions per client: 10000 number of transactions actually processed: 100000/100000 tps = 5653.187997 (including connections establishing) tps = 5660.554438 (excluding connections establishing) pgbench -Upostgres -s 100 -c 10 -t 10000 benchmark starting vacuum...end. transaction type: TPC-B (sort of) scaling factor: 100 number of clients: 10 number of transactions per client: 10000 number of transactions actually processed: 100000/100000 tps = 5536.019864 (including connections establishing) tps = 5543.834350 (excluding connections establishing)
