On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:28 AM, Robert Klemme <shortcutter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ugh - yeah - sorry. RAID-1 for the 2-disk OS and WAL.
Correction: RAID-1 on the 2x15k local storage device for OS
Clarification: RAID-10 on the 8x15k SAN device for $PGDATA
Correction: RAID-1 on the 2x15k SAN device for $PGDATA/pg_log
Thanks for the reference, Robert.
Hi Jan,
You should quickly patent this solution. As far as I know you need at
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:10 AM, Jan Nielsen <jan.sture.nielsen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Below is the hardware, firmware, OS, and PG configuration pieces that I'm
> settling in on. As was noted, the local storage used for OS is actually two
> disks with RAID 10. If anything appears like a mistake or something is
> missing, I'd appreciate the feedback.
least four disks for RAID 10. :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID#Nested_.28hybrid.29_RAID
Or did you mean RAID 1?
Ugh - yeah - sorry. RAID-1 for the 2-disk OS and WAL.
> I'm still working on the benchmarks scripts and I don't have good/reliableYeah, does not seem to make a lot of sense to test during this phase.
> numbers yet since our SAN is still very busy reconfiguring from the 2x4 to
> 1x8. I'm hoping to get them running tomorrow when the SAN should complete
> its 60 hours of reconfiguration.
You're welcome!
> Thanks, again, for all the great feedback.
> 300GB RAID10 2x15k drive for OS on local storage
Correction: RAID-1 on the 2x15k local storage device for OS
> */dev/sda1 RA* 4096See above.
> */dev/sda1 FS* ext4
> */dev/sda1 MO*
> 600GB RAID 10 8x15k drive for $PGDATA on SAN
Clarification: RAID-10 on the 8x15k SAN device for $PGDATA
> *IO Scheduler sda* noop anticipatory deadline [cfq]
> */dev/sdb1 RA* 4096
> */dev/sdb1 FS* xfs
> */dev/sdb1 MO*
> allocsize=256m,attr2,logbufs=8,logbsize=256k,noatime
>
> 300GB RAID 10 2x15k drive for $PGDATA/pg_xlog on SAN
Correction: RAID-1 on the 2x15k SAN device for $PGDATA/pg_log
> *IO Scheduler sdb* noop anticipatory deadline [cfq]See above.
> */dev/sde1 RA* 4096
> */dev/sde1 FS* xfs
> */dev/sde1 MO* allocsize=256m,attr2,logbufs=8,logbsize=256k,noatime
> *IO Scheduler sde* noop anticipatory deadline [cfq]
With regard to the scheduler, I have frequently read that [deadline]
and [noop] perform better for PG loads. Fortunately this can be
easily changed.
Maybe this also has some additional input:
http://www.fccps.cz/download/adv/frr/hdd/hdd.html
Thanks for the reference, Robert.
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:54 AM, John Lister <john.lister@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Separating avoids interference between OS and WAL logging (i.e. a
> I was wondering if it would be better to put the xlog on the same disk as
> the OS? Apart from the occasional log writes I'd have thought most OS data
> is loaded into cache at the beginning, so you effectively have an unused
> disk. This gives you another spindle (mirrored) for your data.
>
> Or have I missed something fundamental?
script running berserk and filling OS filesystem). Also it's easier
to manage (e.g. in case of relocation to another volume etc.). And
you can have different mount options (i.e. might want to have atime
for OS volume).
Kind regards
robert
--
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/