| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
| Cc: | "jason(at)ohloh(dot)net" <jason(at)ohloh(dot)net>, Geoff Tolley <geoff(at)polimetrix(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SCSI vs SATA |
| Date: | 2007-04-04 15:40:33 |
| Message-ID: | 4613C6F1.3090009@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
>> SATAII brute forces itself through some of its performance, for
>> example 16MB write cache on each drive.
>
> sure but for any serious usage one either wants to disable that
> cache(and rely on tagged command queuing or how that is called in SATAII
Why? Assuming we have a BBU, why would you turn off the cache?
> world) or rely on the OS/raidcontroller implementing some sort of
> FUA/write barrier feature(which linux for example only does in pretty
> recent kernels)
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
>
> Stefan
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Kostyrka | 2007-04-04 15:43:05 | Re: SCSI vs SATA |
| Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2007-04-04 15:33:32 | Re: SCSI vs SATA |