Karim Nassar wrote:
Thanks to all for the tips.
...
In general I would recommend RAID1, because that is the safe bet. If your db is the bottleneck, and your data isn't all that critical, and you are read heavy, I would probably go with RAID1, if you are write
^^^^^ -> RAID0
Sounds decent to me.heavy I would say 2 independent disks.
I feel that we have enough data safety such that I want to go for speed. Some of the queries are very large joins, and I am going for pure throughput at this point - unless someone can find a hole in my backup tactic.
Of course, later we will have money to throw at more spindles. But for now, I am trying gaze in to the future and maximize my current capabilities.
Seems to me that the "best" solution would be:
* disk 0 partition 1..n - os mounts partition n+1 - /var/lib/postgres/data/pg_xlog
* disk 1 partition 1 - /var/lib/postgres/data
* Further (safe) performance gains can be had by adding more spindles as
such: - first disk: RAID1 to disk 1
- next 2 disks: RAID 0 across the above
I did make the mistake that you might want to consider a RAID0. But the performance gains might be small, and you potentially lose everything.
But your update strategy seems dead on.
Do I grok it?
Thanks again,
John =:->
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
