Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent
От | Mark Kirkwood |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent |
Дата | |
Msg-id | dadb1945-062f-c565-26ee-d334898d7cf5@catalyst.net.nz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent (Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent
Re: [PERFORM] Very poor read performance, query independent |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Thinking about this a bit more - if somewhat more blazing performance is needed, then this could be achieved via losing the RAID card and spinning disks altogether and buying 1 of the NVME or SATA solid state products: e.g - Samsung 960 Pro or Evo 2 TB (approx 1 or 2 GB/s seq scan speeds and 200K IOPS) - Intel S3610 or similar 1.2 TB (500 MB/s seq scan and 30K IOPS) The Samsung needs an M.2 port on the mobo (but most should have 'em - and if not PCIe X4 adapter cards are quite cheap). The Intel is a bit more expensive compared to the Samsung, and is slower but has a longer lifetime. However for your workload the Sammy is probably fine. regards Mark On 15/07/17 11:09, Mark Kirkwood wrote: > Ah yes - that seems more sensible (but still slower than I would > expect for 5 disks RAID 0).
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: