Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3032.1051024725@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") (Ben Clewett <B.Clewett@roadrunner.uk.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Ben Clewett <B.Clewett@roadrunner.uk.com> writes: > If I wanted to divide the postmaster read() calls evenly to files > located over several physical disks, how would you suggest distributing > the data-space? AFAIK, the single biggest win you can get in this dimension is to put the WAL log ($PGDATA/pg_xlog/) on a separate spindle from everything else. At least for write-intensive databases, that can buy you something like 2x improvement for the price of one easy symlink. After that, the conventional wisdom is to put indexes on a third spindle (separate from base tables and from xlog). But the bookkeeping and maintenance effort needed for that is really too high to make it worth worrying about, IMHO :-(. Eventually we will have some kind of tablespace feature to make it easy. My recommendation at the moment would be: WAL on dedicated spindle, everything else on the best RAID array you can set up. And buy as much RAM as you can afford. See past discussions in pgsql-performance for more info. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: