Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

2003-09-13 Thread Cott Lang
Having WAL on a separate drive from the database would be something of a win. I'd buy that 1 disk for OS+WAL and then RAID [something] across the other two drives for the database would be pretty helpful. Just my .02, I did a lot of testing before I deployed our ~50GB postgresql databases

Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

2003-09-12 Thread Matt Clark
the machine will be dealing with lots of inserts, basically as many as we can throw at it If you mean lots of _transactions_ with few inserts per transaction you should get a RAID controller w/ battery backed write-back cache. Nothing else will improve your write performance by nearly as

[PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

2003-09-12 Thread Richard Jones
Hi all, I have some new hardware on the way and would like some advice on how to get the most out of it.. its a dual xeon 2.4, 4gb ram and 3x identical 15k rpm scsi disks should i mirror 2 of the disks for postgres data, and use the 3rd disk for the o/s and the pg logs or raid5 the 3 disks or

Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

2003-09-12 Thread Richard Jones
The machine is coming from dell, and i have the option of a PERC 3/SC RAID Controller (32MB) or software raid. does anyone have any experience of this controller? its an additional £345 for this controller, i'd be interested to know what people think - my other option is to buy the raid

Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance - Dell

2003-09-12 Thread Thom Dyson
The Dell PERC controllers have a very strong reputation for terrible performance. If you search the archives of the Dell Linux Power Edge list (dell.com/linux), you will find many, many people who get better performance from software RAID, rather than the hw RAID on the PERC. Having said that,

Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

2003-09-12 Thread Will LaShell
I would like to point out though on the PERC controllers that are LSI based ( Megaraid ) there -are- settings that can be changed to fix any o the performance issues. Check the linux megaraid driver list archives to see the full description. I've seen it come up many times and basically all the

Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance - Dell

2003-09-12 Thread Christopher Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thom Dyson) writes: The Dell PERC controllers have a very strong reputation for terrible performance. If you search the archives of the Dell Linux Power Edge list (dell.com/linux), you will find many, many people who get better performance from software RAID, rather than

Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

2003-09-12 Thread Rod Taylor
On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 12:55, Richard Jones wrote: The machine is coming from dell, and i have the option of a PERC 3/SC RAID Controller (32MB) or software raid. does anyone have any experience of this controller? its an additional £345 for this controller, i'd be interested to know what

Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

2003-09-12 Thread Richard Jones
The dual xeon arrangement is because the machine will also have to do some collaborative filtering which is very cpu intensive and very disk un-intensive, after loading the data into ram. On Friday 12 September 2003 5:49 pm, you wrote: RIchard, its a dual xeon 2.4, 4gb ram and 3x identical

Re: [PERFORM] best arrangement of 3 disks for (insert) performance

2003-09-12 Thread Josh Berkus
RIchard, its a dual xeon 2.4, 4gb ram and 3x identical 15k rpm scsi disks should i mirror 2 of the disks for postgres data, and use the 3rd disk for the o/s and the pg logs or raid5 the 3 disks or even stripe 2 disks for pg and use the 3rd for o/s,logs,backups ? I'd mirror 2. Stripey