Re: Integrated perc 5/i

From: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: tyrrill_ed(at)emc(dot)com
Cc: miki(at)epoch(dot)co(dot)il, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Integrated perc 5/i
Date: 2007-08-16 22:41:00
Message-ID: 20070816224059.GR54309@nasby.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 01:30:11PM -0400, tyrrill_ed(at)emc(dot)com wrote:
> Hi Miki,
> by 40%. I have not tried RAID 10 so I cannot help you there. My
> suggestion is test both RAID 5 and RAID 10, and report back to us what
> you find.

Unless you're running something like a data warehouse, I'd put a real
low priority on testing RAID5... it's rarely a good idea for a database.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2007-08-16 23:10:53 Re: Indexscan is only used if we use "limit n"
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2007-08-16 22:25:07 Re: Integrated perc 5/i