Re: How to improve db performance with $7K?
От | Alex Turner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: How to improve db performance with $7K? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 33c6269f05041811165228c814@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: How to improve db performance with $7K? (Jacques Caron <jc@directinfos.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: How to improve db performance with $7K?
Re: How to improve db performance with $7K? |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Ok - well - I am partially wrong... If you're stripe size is 64Kb, and you are reading 256k worth of data, it will be spread across four drives, so you will need to read from four devices to get your 256k of data (RAID 0 or 5 or 10), but if you are only reading 64kb of data, I guess you would only need to read from one disk. So my assertion that adding more drives doesn't help is pretty wrong... particularly with OLTP because it's always dealing with blocks that are smaller that the stripe size. Alex Turner netEconomist On 4/18/05, Jacques Caron <jc@directinfos.com> wrote: > Hi, > > At 18:56 18/04/2005, Alex Turner wrote: > >All drives are required to fill every request in all RAID levels > > No, this is definitely wrong. In many cases, most drives don't actually > have the data requested, how could they handle the request? > > When reading one random sector, only *one* drive out of N is ever used to > service any given request, be it RAID 0, 1, 0+1, 1+0 or 5. > > When writing: > - in RAID 0, 1 drive > - in RAID 1, RAID 0+1 or 1+0, 2 drives > - in RAID 5, you need to read on all drives and write on 2. > > Otherwise, what would be the point of RAID 0, 0+1 or 1+0? > > Jacques. > >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: