From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Vivek Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: How to improve db performance with $7K? |
Date: | 2005-04-15 15:58:47 |
Message-ID: | 425FE4B7.6080406@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Vivek Khera wrote:
>
> On Apr 14, 2005, at 10:03 PM, Kevin Brown wrote:
>
>> Now, bad block remapping destroys that guarantee, but unless you've
>> got a LOT of bad blocks, it shouldn't destroy your performance, right?
>>
>
> ALL disks have bad blocks, even when you receive them. you honestly
> think that these large disks made today (18+ GB is the smallest now)
> that there are no defects on the surfaces?
That is correct. It is just that the HD makers will mark the bad blocks
so that the OS knows not to use them. You can also run the bad blocks
command to try and find new bad blocks.
Over time hard drives get bad blocks. It doesn't always mean you have to
replace the drive but it does mean you need to maintain it and usually
at least backup, low level (if scsi) and mark bad blocks. Then restore.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> /me remembers trying to cram an old donated 5MB (yes M) disk into an old
> 8088 Zenith PC in college...
>
> Vivek Khera, Ph.D.
> +1-301-869-4449 x806
>
--
Your PostgreSQL solutions provider, Command Prompt, Inc.
24x7 support - 1.800.492.2240, programming, and consulting
Home of PostgreSQL Replicator, plPHP, plPerlNG and pgPHPToolkit
http://www.commandprompt.com / http://www.postgresql.org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex Turner | 2005-04-15 16:07:58 | Re: Intel SRCS16 SATA raid? |
Previous Message | Vivek Khera | 2005-04-15 15:52:47 | Re: Intel SRCS16 SATA raid? |