| From: | "Graeme B(dot) Bell" <graeme(dot)bell(at)nibio(dot)no> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Graeme B(dot) Bell" <graeme(dot)bell(at)nibio(dot)no>, Michael Nolan <htfoot(at)gmail(dot)com>, "hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi" <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "Wes Vaske (wvaske)" <wvaske(at)micron(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations? |
| Date: | 2015-07-07 17:58:04 |
| Message-ID: | 47ED2685-E424-4966-A4E4-A8A16C0FA164@skogoglandskap.no |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 07 Jul 2015, at 19:47, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> [I know that using a shingled disk sounds crazy (it sounds crazy to me) but you can bet there are people that just want to max out the disk bays in their server... ]
>
> Let's just say no online backup companies are using those disks. :)
I'm not so sure. Literally the most famous online backup company is (or was planning to):
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/6-tb-hard-drive-face-off/
But I think that a massive read-only archive really is the only use for these things. I hope they go out of fashion, soon.
But I was thinking more of the 'small company postgres server' or 'charitable organisation postgres server'.
Someone is going to make this mistake, you can bet.
Probably not someone on THIS list, of course...
> Biggest current production spinners being used I know of are 4TB,
> non-shingled.
I think we may have some 6TB WD reds around here. I'll need to look around.
G
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Wes Vaske (wvaske) | 2015-07-07 18:01:17 | Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations? |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2015-07-07 17:47:31 | Re: New server: SSD/RAID recommendations? |