On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 01:02:18PM -0500, Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 12:40, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 12:47:43PM -0700, Qingqing Zhuo wrote: > > > Xlog will be the only believable data if your system crashed. So it is a > > > dangerous practice to put xlog stuff in RAID0. > > > > No more or less so than putting your main database on RAID0. If any > > drive fails, you lose everything. > > Sounds like a good place to have replication.
If you used syncronous replication, maybe. Otherwise failure of any drive means you just lost data. And remember that the more drives you have in your array the more likely you'll have a failure in a given time period. Basically, if you can afford to setup replication on 2 machines with RAID0 you can afford to setup RAID10 on one machine, which will usually be a better bet. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
