Re: two disks - best way to use them?
От | Ron |
---|---|
Тема | Re: two disks - best way to use them? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6.2.5.6.0.20051202145746.01dc7b68@earthlink.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | two disks - best way to use them? ("Rick Schumeyer" <rschumeyer@ieee.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: two disks - best way to use them?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
At 01:58 PM 12/2/2005, Rick Schumeyer wrote: >I installed another drive in my linux pc in an attempt to improve performance >on a large COPY to a table with a geometry index. > >Based on previous discussion, it seems there are three things >competing for the hard drive: > >1) the input data file >2) the pg table >3) the WAL > >What is the best way to distribute these among two drives? From >Tom's comments >I would think that the pg table and the WAL should be >separate. Does it matter where the input data is? Best is to have 3 HD or HD sets, one for each of the above. With only 2, and assuming the input file is too large to fit completely into RAM at once, I'd test to see whether: a= input on one + pg table & WAL on the other, or b= WAL on one + pg table & input file on the other is best. If the input file can be made 100% RAM resident, then use c= pg table on one + WAL and input file on the other. The big goal here is to minimize HD head seeks. Ron
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: