On 26 Sep 2002 at 10:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> writes:
> > If it's any help, when I was testing recently with WAL on a separate
> > drive, the WAL logs were doing more read&writes per second than the main
> > data drive.
>
> ... but way fewer seeks. For anything involving lots of updating
> transactions (and certainly 5000 separate insertions per second would
> qualify; can those be batched??), it should be a win to put WAL on its
> own spindle, just to get locality of access to the WAL.
Probably they will be a single transcation. If possible we will bunch more of
them together.. like 5 seconds of data pushed down in a single transaction but
not sure it's possible..
This is bit like replication but from live oracle machine to postgres, from
information I have. So there should be some chance of tuning there..
Bye
Shridhar
--
Langsam's Laws: (1) Everything depends. (2) Nothing is always. (3) Everything
is sometimes.