Re: Re: Re: Fast Inserts and Hardware Questions

From: "Steve Wolfe" <steve(at)iboats(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Fast Inserts and Hardware Questions
Date: 2001-03-16 22:17:31
Message-ID: 001501c0ae66$e5b7d060$50824e40@iboats.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> Yes, it is RAID-5 on the big box. Unfortunately, I don't have any spare
RAID
> equipped boxes sitting around, so I can't experiment with the different
RAID
> levels. Still, you'd think that even a "slow" RAID-5 configuration would
be
> faster than a $98 IDE drive...

Yes, it certainly should be. Right now I have a Mylex 170 in my machine
for testing, hooked to 4 IBM 9-gig drives. Three of them are in a RAID 5
array, the last is a hot-spare. Copying data from the IDE drive to the RAID
array, the IDE drive reads at full speed, the lights on the RAID array just
blink quickly about once per second. The controller has 64 megs of cache on
it, but I've copied far larger data sets than that (several gigabytes), and
the behavior has been the same.

So... yes, RAID 5 is slower than RAID 0 or 1 for writes. But it's still
dang fast, especially compared to a single IDE drive.

steve

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Castle 2001-03-16 22:18:38 Re: Re: Re: Fast Inserts and Hardware Questions
Previous Message Jeff Williams 2001-03-16 22:04:58 Installation on Windows 2000