Re: table spaces

On 3/13/2013 6:26 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> I have to tell you though, we had a server with twelve spindles three
> years ago, and it barely kept up with our transaction load. We had two
> hot spares, a RAID-1, and 8-disks in a RAID-10. Several pgbench tests
> back then showed that our RAID-10 could only adequately serve 1800TPS
> directly, and we needed at least 6000. Ultimately, it lead to us
> switching to NVRAM (SSD) for high TPS data, and creating a tablespace
> on a RAID-10 for archived or low-priority data.

I've got a server in my lab we use for benchmarking and testing that has
a 20 disk raid10 of 15k 150gb SAS2 drives.   is faaassssst.    I don't
remember the IOPS numbers off the top of my head but 4 SSD's in a raid0
were only a little bit faster at heavy OLTP small transaction
write-intensive operations.



--
john r pierce                                      37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast