as I can see, this
behaviour is according to the book.
Are there any progresses in maybe 9.2 to make this any better? If not, how
schould we handle this? We can also not choose to parition, but how will that
perform on a 100 GB table?
Kind regards,
Christiaan Willemsen
Hey there,
We are looking at beefing up our servers with SSD's. Some of you did some
interesting tests with the Intel 320. So the idea came to make a RAID10 with
four 600GB models.
I did however do some calculations with the current database server (220GB
database, expected to grow to 1TB
those files, or will it panic and not start at all,
or can we just manually reindex?
Kind regards,
Christiaan
-Original message-
From: Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
Sent: Sun 04-04-2010 23:08
To: Christiaan Willemsen cwillem...@technocon.com;
CC: pgsql-performance
Hi there,
About a year ago we setup a machine with sixteen 15k disk spindles on Solaris
using ZFS. Now that Oracle has taken Sun, and is closing up Solaris, we want to
move away (we are more familiar with Linux anyway).
So the plan is to move to Linux and put the data on a SAN using
Hi there,
I configured OpenSolaris on our OpenSolaris Machine. Specs:
2x Quad 2.6 Ghz Xeon
64 GB of memory
16x 15k5 SAS
The filesystem is configured using ZFS, and I think I have found a
configuration that performs fairly well.
I installed the standard PostgreSQL that came with the
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
PostgreSQL is only going to use what it needs. It relies on the OS for
much of the caching etc...
So that would actually mean that I could raise the setting of the ARC
cache to far more than 8 GB? As I said, our database is 250 GB, So I
would expect that postgres
itself to 8GB.
That is correct, but since it will use the whole 8 GB anyway, I can just
as easily say that it will reseve that memory ;)
Some comments below:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 8:15 AM, Christiaan Willemsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there,
I configured
Thanks guys,
Lots of info here that I didn't know about! Since I have one of the
latest Opensolaris builds, I guess the write throttle feature is
already in there. Sadly, the blog doesn't say what build has it
included.
For writes, I do everything synchronized because we really need a
On Aug 29, 2008, at 4:43 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Christiaan Willemsen wrote:
Anyway, I'm going to return the controller, because it does not
scale very well with more that 4 disks in raid 10. Bandwidth is
limited to 350MB/sec, and IOPS scale badly with extra disks
Thanks Joshua,
So what about putting the indexes on a separate array? Since we do a lot
of inserts indexes are going to be worked on a lot of the time.
Regards,
Christiaan
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Christiaan Willemsen wrote:
So, what you are basically saying, is that a single mirror
, Christiaan Willemsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Joshua,
So what about putting the indexes on a separate array? Since we do
a lot of inserts indexes are going to be worked on a lot of the time.
Regards,
Christiaan
Joshua D. Drake wrote
I'm currently trying to find out what the best configuration is for
our new database server. It will server a database of about 80 GB and
growing fast. The new machine has plenty of memory (64GB) and 16 SAS
disks, of wich two are already in use as a mirror for the OS.
The rest can be used
, Aug 20, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Christiaan Willemsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm currently trying to find out what the best configuration is for
our new
database server. It will server a database of about 80 GB and
growing fast.
The new machine has plenty of memory (64GB) and 16 SAS disks, of
wich
13 matches
Mail list logo
