Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")
От | Ben Clewett |
---|---|
Тема | Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3EA4FC72.4080800@roadrunner.uk.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") ("Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew@zeut.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?")
Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing Re: For the ametures. (related to "Are we losing momentum?") |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ben Clewett" <B.Clewett@roadrunner.uk.com> >>Working with IDE drives on PC's, you can double the performace of a DB >>just by putting half the tables on a disk on another IDE chain. > > > You can do this using symlinks, but you do have to shut down the postmaster > before you play with the files directly. I was hoping this was the case. :) From my data/base directory, I have a tree structure of numbered files of no obvious structure. As well as some smaller directories, 'global', 'pg_xlog' and 'pg_clog'. 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? Would it be as simple as putting each child directory in 'data/base' on a different physical disk in a round-robbin fasion using symbolic links: Or is it more involved... data/base/1 -> /dev/hda data/base/2 -> /dev/hdb data/base/3 -> /dev/hdc data/base/4 -> /dev/hda data/base/5 -> /dev/hdb data/base/6 -> /dev/hdc (etc) (I have made the assumption that the postmaster serves different connections in parallel, otherwise this would have little effect :) Thanks, Ben
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: