hi, thank you for the reply.
I ran a number of tests to try to make sense of this.
When I ran with or without vacuum, the number of disk io operations,
cache operations etc. gathered from pg_stat table for the insertions
are pretty much the same.
So I don't see vacuum reduce disk io operations.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Justin Pitts wrote:
As others said, RAID6 is RAID5 + a hot spare.
>>>
>>> No. RAID6 is NOT RAID5 plus a hot spare.
>>
>> The original phrase was that RAID 6 was like RAID 5 with a hot spare
>> ALREADY BUILT IN.
>
> Built-in, or not - it is neither. It is more
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 3:17 AM, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>
>> RAID6 is basically RAID5 with a hot spare already built into the
>> array.
>
> On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, Pierre C wrote:
>>
>> As others said, RAID6 is RAID5 + a hot spare.
>
> No. RAID6 is NOT RAID5
On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Scott Marlowe wrote:
RAID6 is basically RAID5 with a hot spare already built into the
array.
On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, Pierre C wrote:
As others said, RAID6 is RAID5 + a hot spare.
No. RAID6 is NOT RAID5 plus a hot spare.
RAID5 uses a single parity datum (XOR) to ensure protec
