Re: filesystem option tuning

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: filesystem option tuning
Дата
Msg-id 20195.1085843886@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: filesystem option tuning  (Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar@frodo.hserus.net>)
Список pgsql-performance
Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar@frodo.hserus.net> writes:
> On Wednesday 19 May 2004 13:02, share-postgres@think42.com wrote:
> - If you can put WAL on separate disk(s), all the better.
>>
>> Does that mean only the xlog, or also the clog?

> You can put clog and xlog on same drive.

You can, but I think you shouldn't.  The entire argument for giving xlog
its own drive revolves around the fact that xlog is written
sequentially, and so if it has its own spindle then you have near-zero
seek requirements.  As soon as you give that drive any other work to do,
you start losing the low-seek property.

Now as Shridhar says, clog is not a very high-I/O-volume thing, so in
one sense it doesn't much matter which drive you put it on.  But it
seems to me that clog acts much more like ordinary table files than it
acts like xlog.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Shridhar Daithankar
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: filesystem option tuning
Следующее
От: Duane Lee - EGOVX
Дата:
Сообщение: Trigger & Function