| From: | Michael Stone <mstone+postgres(at)mathom(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Bad iostat numbers |
| Date: | 2006-12-04 17:43:22 |
| Message-ID: | 20061204174320.GX1622@mathom.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 12:37:29PM -0500, Alex Turner wrote:
>This discussion I think is important, as I think it would be useful for this
>list to have a list of RAID cards that _do_ work well under Linux/BSD for
>people as recommended hardware for Postgresql. So far, all I can recommend
>is what I've found to be good, which is 3ware 9500 series cards with 10k
>SATA drives. Throughput was great until you reached higher levels of RAID
>10 (the bonnie++ mark I posted showed write speed is a bit slow). But that
>doesn't solve the problem for SCSI. What cards in the SCSI arena solve the
>problem optimally? Why should we settle for sub-optimal performance in SCSI
>when there are a number of almost optimally performing cards in the SATA
>world (Areca, 3Ware/AMCC, LSI).
Well, one factor is to be more precise about what you're looking for; a
HBA != RAID controller, and you may be comparing apples and oranges. (If
you have an external array with an onboard controller you probably want
a simple HBA rather than a RAID controller.)
Mike Stone
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joost Kraaijeveld | 2006-12-04 17:48:19 | How to move pg_xlog to another drive on Windows???? |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2006-12-04 17:42:57 | Re: Configuration settings for 32GB RAM server |