Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 22:06:38 -0400 From: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: Brandon Fosdick <bfoz@bfoz.net> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, Erik Stian Tefre <erik@tefre.com> Subject: Re: Create 2.5TB file system on 5.4S? Message-ID: <43014A2E.6090306@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <42FFEC84.7010200@bfoz.net> References: <42FFB1EB.5040802@bfoz.net> <20050815025551.nq3khliw2s4ow0w0@banan.netlife.no> <42FFEC84.7010200@bfoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brandon Fosdick wrote: > Erik Stian Tefre wrote: >> You can avoid the problem by splitting the array up in partitions >> smaller than >> 2TB each. (I know this does not answer your question, but it >> simplifies things, >> and it works for me(TM)... :-) > > :) Thanks, but I thought of that already. This is going to be a big > database server and I don't want to have to deal with splitting the > database across two partitions. If it's going to be a big database server, why aren't you using all of those drive spindles to help break up the I/O load? :-) Ask almost any Oracle or Sybase DB guru, and they'll ask for at least six disks as three RAID-1 mirrors as a basic configuration, and would prefer 8 or 10 to also hold the OS and the rollback logs on additional volumes. Blah, I tried to point to some Oracle docs, but they're behind a registration-required section. At the very least, you want to have your tablespace and your logs on seperate spindles, ie, for a minimal config beyond just a single disk, you'd put the boot volume and logs together, and have a second disk or RAID volume for your main tablespace. About the worst thing you could do to a database is put all of your disks into one single RAID-5 volume. (Unless your database will be read-only.) -- -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43014A2E.6090306>