Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 28 May 2001 19:49:40 +0200
From:      Christoph Sold <so@server.i-clue.de>
To:        "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net>
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: brainstorm: "intermediate" disk caching
Message-ID:  <3B128FB4.70AE7C69@i-clue.de>
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.20.0105281619110.5344-100000@www.everquick.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


"E.B. Dreger" schrieb:
> 
> Greetings all,
> 
> I just had a brainstorm...
> 
> I was thinking about database servers with several spindles in a RAID 5
> array.  Write performance is inherently disappointing -- which may or may
> not be an issue.

It is. Even RAID 1 is better than RAID 5 _for_database_use_. For added
security, have run a RAID 10 array (basically, a mirrored stripe set).

> Would it be worth the trouble to design an "intermediate" cache, whereby
> data are quickly written to a spool disk, then to the final destination?
> Sort of like softwares that cache CDROMs on HDD...
> 
> My gut feel is that this would be more trouble than it's worth, would not
> net any overall performance*reliability (expressed as a product) gain, and
> that one might actually realize a p*r decrease.

IMHO it would speed up your DB significantly to have it a) run on a RAID
10 array and b) have it run on the raw disk. Two layers of lag reduced
(well, for reads it is possibly only one layer).

HTH
-Christoph Sold

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B128FB4.70AE7C69>