Re: pg_xlog safety
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_xlog safety |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200301272315.h0RNFCi20958@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_xlog safety (Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_xlog safety
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 05:26:15PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > If you raid has battery-backed RAM cach in your controller, there is no > > advantage to putting WAL on a separate disk --- was that the case? > > That was always my view, as well. But someone presented me with an > argument that it would somehow be better to use separate disks inside > the array in order to make this faster (i.e. it'd still be faster > because there'd be no contention for spindles). So, I tried it, but > I could see no difference no matter what I did. With battery-backed RAM, you would have to fill up that cache faster than it can flush it (at its leasure) to the disk. It would take a heck of a lot of activity to cause that. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: