Re: Distant mirroring
От | dforums |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Distant mirroring |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 48A04C17.3030005@vieonet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Distant mirroring ("Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Distant mirroring
("Fernando Hevia" <fhevia@ip-tel.com.ar>)
Re: Distant mirroring ("Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Houlala I got headache !!! So please help...........;; "Assuming they all happen from 9 to 5 and during business days only, that's about 86 transactions per second. Well within the realm of a single mirror set to keep up if you don't make your db work real fat." OK i like, But my reality is that to make an insert of a table that have 27 millions of entrance it took 200 ms. so it took between 2 minutes and 10 minutes to treat 3000 records and dispatch/agregate in other tables. And I have for now 20000 records every 3 minutes. At the moment I have a I have a Linux 2.6.24.2-xxxx-std-ipv4-64 #3 SMP Tue Feb 12 12:27:47 CET 2008 x86_64 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5355 @ 2.66GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux with 8Gb of memory. Using sata II disk in RAID 1 (I known that is bad, but it would change has quickly I can). I got 1-2 GO per week I can change to 2 kinds of server, using 8.3.3 postgresql server, and even taking more sever if need. But it is the biggest computer that I can rent for now. Intel 2x Xeon X5355 2x 4x 2.66 GHz L2: 8Mo, FSB: 1333MHz Double Quadruple Coeur 64 bits 12 Go FBDIMM DDR2 2x 147 Go SAS 15 000 tr/min RAID 1 HARD I can add 500 Go under sataII OR Intel 2x Xeon X5355 2x 4x 2.66 GHz L2: 8Mo, FSB: 1333MHz Double Quadruple Coeur 64 bits 12 Go FBDIMM DDR2 5x 750 Go (2.8 To **) SATA2 RAID HARD 5 I can add 500 Go under sataII After several tunings, reading, ect... The low speed seems to be definetly linked to the SATA II in RAID 1. So I need a solution to be able to 1st supporting more transaction, secondly I need to secure the data, and being able to load balancing the charge. Please, give me any advise or suggestion that can help me. regards to all David Scott Marlowe a écrit : > On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 11:29 AM, dforum <dforums@vieonet.com> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I'm trying to install a solution to permit me to : >> - Secure the datas, without RAID > > Nothing beats a simple mirror set for simplicity while protecting the > data, and for a pretty cheap cost. How much is your data worth? > >> - Giving ability to increase the potentiality of the database towards the >> needs. >> >> I have read about slony, DRBD, pgpool.... >> >> I don't find the good system to do what I want. >> >> I manage for now 50 millions of request per month. > > Assuming they all happen from 9 to 5 and during business days only, > that's about 86 transactions per second. Well within the realm of a > single mirror set to keep up if you don't make your db work real fat. > >> I will reach 100 millions in the end of the year I suppose. > > That takes us to 172 transactions per second. > >> There is 2 difficulties : >> 1 - is the storage : to get faster access,it is recommend to use SAS 15 000 >> tps. But the disk I can get are 149 GO of space. As the database is growing >> par 1,7 Go per week at the moment, it will reach is maximum in 3 month. I >> can add 3 disk at least so It can go to 9 month. What to do after, and >> especially what to do today to prevent it? > > No, don't piecemeal just enough to outrun the disk space boogieman > each month. Buy enough to last you at least 1 year in the future. > More if you can afford it. > >> 2 - The machine will treat more and more simultaneous entrance, so I need to >> loadbalance those inserts/updates on several machine and to replicate the >> datas between them. It's not a real problem if the data are asynchrony. > > Then PostgreSQL might not be your best choice. But I think you're > wrong. You can easily handle the load you're talking about on a > mid-sized box for about $5000 to $10000. > > You can use 7200 rpm SATA drives, probably 8 to 12 or so, in a RAID-10 > with a battery backed cache and hit 172 transactions per second. > > Given the 1+ G a week storage requirement, you should definitely look > at using inheritance to do partitioning. Then use slony or something > to replicate the data into the back office for other things. There's > always other things most the time that are read only. > -- <http://www.1st-affiliation.fr> *David Bigand *Président Directeur Générale* *51 chemin des moulins 73000 CHAMBERY - FRANCE Web : htttp://www.1st-affiliation.fr Email : david@1st-affiliation.com Tel. : +33 479 696 685 Mob. : +33 666 583 836 Skype : firstaffiliation_support
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: