On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 8:36 PM, tuanhoanganh <hatuan05@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I have IBM x3560 with 2G RAM - RAID 5 3 disk - PostgreSQL 9.0.6 64bit on >> Windows 2003 64bit >> I had read some tuning guide, it recomment not use RAID 5. So Raid 5 is >> bestter than 3 disk independent or not. >> >> Here is my pgbench -h %HOST% -p 5433 -U postgres -c 10 -T 1800 -s 10 >> pgbench >> >> pgbench -h 127.0.0.1 -p 5433 -U postgres -c 10 -T 1800 -s 10 pgbench >> Scale option ignored, using pgbench_branches table count = 10 >> starting vacuum...end. >> transaction type: TPC-B (sort of) >> scaling factor: 10 >> query mode: simple >> number of clients: 10 >> number of threads: 1 >> duration: 1800 s >> number of transactions actually processed: 775366 >> tps = 430.736191 (including connections establishing) >> tps = 430.780400 (excluding connections establishing) > > RAID 5 is aweful. Look up RAID 1E for 3 disks: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-standard_RAID_levels#RAID_1E If Windows doesn't support RAID 1E then setup a mirror set and use the third drive as a hot spare. Still faster than RAID-5. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
