Re: Unexpected pgbench result
От | Shaun Thomas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Unexpected pgbench result |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52B44FD8.2030105@optionshouse.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Unexpected pgbench result (Dave Johansen <davejohansen@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Unexpected pgbench result
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 12/19/2013 04:06 PM, Dave Johansen wrote: > Right now, we're running a RAID 1 for pg_clog, pg_log and pg_xlog and > then a RAID 1+0 with 12 disks for the data. Would there be any benefit > to running a separate RAID 1+0 with a tablespace for the indexes? Not really. PostgreSQL doesn't currently support parallel backend fetches, aggregation, or really anything. It's looking like 9.4 will get us a lot closer to that, but right now, everything is serial. Serial or not, separate backends will have separate read concerns, and PostgreSQL 9.2 and above *do* support index only scans. So theoretically, you might actually see some benefit there. If it were me and I had spindles available, I would just increase the overall size of the pool. It's a lot easier than managing multiple tablespaces. -- Shaun Thomas OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604 312-676-8870 sthomas@optionshouse.com ______________________________________________ See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: