On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 6:06 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 06/22/10 16:40, Greg Smith wrote:
>> Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
>>> raid: serveRAID M5014 SAS/SATA controller
>>>
>>
>> Do the "performant servers" have a different RAID card? This one has
>> terrible performance, and could alone be the sour
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 06/23/10 14:00, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Ivan Voras:
>>
>>> On the other hand, RAID10 is simple enough that soft-RAID
>>> implementations should be more than adequate - any ideas why a dedicated
>>> card has it "slow"?
>>
>> Barrier support
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 06/23/10 14:00, Florian Weimer wrote:
Barrier support on RAID10 seems to require some smallish amount of
non-volatile storage which supports a high number of write operations
per second, so a software-only solution might not be available.
If I understa
On 06/23/10 14:00, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Ivan Voras:
>
>> On the other hand, RAID10 is simple enough that soft-RAID
>> implementations should be more than adequate - any ideas why a dedicated
>> card has it "slow"?
>
> Barrier support on RAID10 seems to require some smallish amount of
> non-v
* Ivan Voras:
> On the other hand, RAID10 is simple enough that soft-RAID
> implementations should be more than adequate - any ideas why a dedicated
> card has it "slow"?
Barrier support on RAID10 seems to require some smallish amount of
non-volatile storage which supports a high number of write
On 06/22/10 16:40, Greg Smith wrote:
> Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
>> raid: serveRAID M5014 SAS/SATA controller
>>
>
> Do the "performant servers" have a different RAID card? This one has
> terrible performance, and could alone be the source of your issue. The
> ServeRAID cards are slow in gen
On Jun 22, 2010, at 7:29 AM, Karl Denninger wrote:
> Justin Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 6/22/2010 4:31 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
>>
>>> Would moving WAL dir to separate disk help potentially ?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes it can have a big impact.
> WAL on a separate spindle will make a HUGE dif
Of course, no backup strategy is complete without testing a full restore
onto bare hardware :-)
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Karl Denninger wrote:
> Justin Graf wrote:
>
> On 6/22/2010 4:31 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
>
>
> Would moving WAL dir to separate disk help potentially ?
>
>
>
Justin Graf wrote:
> On 6/22/2010 4:31 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
>
>> Would moving WAL dir to separate disk help potentially ?
>>
>>
>
> Yes it can have a big impact.
WAL on a separate spindle will make a HUGE difference in performance.
TPS rates frequently double OR BETTER with W
Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
raid: serveRAID M5014 SAS/SATA controller
Do the "performant servers" have a different RAID card? This one has
terrible performance, and could alone be the source of your issue. The
ServeRAID cards are slow in general, and certainly slow running RAID10.
--
Gr
On 6/22/2010 4:31 AM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> is there a general problem with raid10 performance postgresql on it?
> We see very low performance on writes (2-3x slower than on less
> performant servers). I wonder if it is solely problem of raid10
> configuration, or if it is post
Hi folks,
is there a general problem with raid10 performance postgresql on it?
We see very low performance on writes (2-3x slower than on less
performant servers). I wonder if it is solely problem of raid10
configuration, or if it is postgresql's thing.
Would moving WAL dir to separate disk help
12 matches
Mail list logo
