Slightly off topic for this thread... I figured I give it a whirl...
I've often wondered what sort of performance increase one would get by placing
the WAL on a solid-state drive like a 2 or 4GB TiGi. Has anyone tested this
type of setup for a performance gain? For a 2GB drive it runs ~$3000. It would
really have to make a difference... I'm strongly cosidering testing this out.
CG
--- Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexander Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> Is it possible to turn WAL completely off. For good reasons, i dont
> >>> ever want to use it. How can i turn it off?
> >>
> >> You can't. The postgresql team is not in the business of producing
> >> databases that can't handle a power failure.
> >>
> >> Any hints as to what your "good reason" is?
>
> > I need a small cluster. Thats the main reason. 30 Mb with no data in it .
> > is pretty large, to me at least. And im not using it in a manner that a
> > power failure will matter.
>
> To be blunt, you don't want Postgres. Consider Berkeley DB or tinysql
> or (holds nose) MySQL. What you're after isn't within the design goals
> for this project, either as to disk footprint or disinterest in power
> failure behavior.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED])---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
