| From: | "G(dot) Anthony Reina" <reina(at)nsi(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-admin(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RAID vs. Single Big SCSI Disk |
| Date: | 2000-12-08 02:24:20 |
| Message-ID: | 3A304654.6EB760D5@nsi.edu |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
We have three databases for our scientific research and are getting
close to filling our 12 Gig partition. My boss thinks that just getting
a really big (i.e. > 30 Gig) SCSI drive will be cheaper and should do
nicely. Currently, we only have 4 people accessing the database and
usually only have 1-2 jobs (e.g. selects, updates, etc.) going at any
one time (probably a high estimate). The db sits on a Pentium II/400 MHz
with RedHat 6.0.
Other than mirroring, are there any other advantages (e.g. speed, cost)
of just getting a RAID controller over, say, a 73 Gig Ultra SCSI Cheetah
drive (which cost in the neighborhood of $1300).
Also, can Postgres handle being spread over several disks? I'd think
that the RAID must control disk spanning, but just want to make sure
that Postgres would be compatible.
Thanks
-Tony Reina
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ørjan Vøllestad | 2000-12-08 07:55:31 | dump & restore problem |
| Previous Message | Ricardo Dias Marques | 2000-12-07 17:51:59 | Re: pg_dump backup problems with password authentication |