Re: With 4 disks should I go for RAID 5 or RAID 10
От | Mark Mielke |
---|---|
Тема | Re: With 4 disks should I go for RAID 5 or RAID 10 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 47728000.4000709@mark.mielke.cc обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | With 4 disks should I go for RAID 5 or RAID 10 ("Fernando Hevia" <fhevia@ip-tel.com.ar>) |
Ответы |
Re: With 4 disks should I go for RAID 5 or RAID 10
Re: With 4 disks should I go for RAID 5 or RAID 10 |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Database will be about 30 GB in size initially and growing 10 GB per year. Data is inserted overnight in two big tables and during the day mostly read-only queries are run. Parallelism is rare.
I have read about different raid levels with Postgres but the advice found seems to apply on 8+ disks systems. With only four disks and performance in mind should I build a RAID 10 or RAID 5 array? Raid 0 is overruled since redundancy is needed.
I am going to use software Raid with Linux (Ubuntu Server 6.06).
In my experience, software RAID 5 is horrible. Write performance can decrease below the speed of one disk on its own, and read performance will not be significantly more than RAID 1+0 as the number of stripes has only increased from 2 to 3, and if reading while writing, you will not get 3X as RAID 5 write requires at least two disks to be involved. I believe hardware RAID 5 is also horrible, but since the hardware hides it from the application, a hardware RAID 5 user might not care.
Software RAID 1+0 works fine on Linux with 4 disks. This is the setup I use for my personal server.
Cheers,
mark
-- Mark Mielke <mark@mielke.cc>
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: