Re: [PERFORM] two disks - best way to use them?

2005-12-06 Thread Thomas Harold
Ron wrote: For accuracy's sake, which exact config did you finally use? How did you choose the config you finally used? Did you test the three options or just pick one? (Note: I'm not the original poster.) I just picked the option of putting the data/pg_xlog directory (WAL) on a 2nd set

Re: [PERFORM] two disks - best way to use them?

2005-12-05 Thread Thomas Harold
Ron wrote: At 01:58 PM 12/2/2005, Rick Schumeyer wrote: I installed another drive in my linux pc in an attempt to improve performance on a large COPY to a table with a geometry index. Based on previous discussion, it seems there are three things competing for the hard drive: 1) the

Re: [PERFORM] two disks - best way to use them?

2005-12-05 Thread Thomas Harold
David Lang wrote: the application can' tell the difference, but the reason for seperating them isn't for the application, it's so that different pieces of hardware can work on different things without having to bounce back and forth between them. useing the same drives with LVM doesn't

Re: [PERFORM] two disks - best way to use them?

2005-12-05 Thread Thomas Harold
David Lang wrote: in that case you logicly have two disks, so see the post from Ron earlier in this thread. And it's a very nice performance gain. Percent spent waiting according to top is down around 10-20% instead of 80-90%. While I'm not prepared to benchmark, database performance is