From: | Craig James <craig_james(at)emolecules(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: RAID card recommendation |
Date: | 2009-12-07 21:53:45 |
Message-ID: | 4B1D7969.20409@emolecules.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Greg Smith wrote:
> Let me try to summarize where things are at a little more clearly, with
> the data accumulated during this long thread:
>
> -Areca: Usually the fastest around. Management tools are limited
> enough that you really want the version with the on-board management
> NIC. May require some testing to find a good driver version.
>
> -3ware: Performance on current models not as good as Areca, but with a
> great set of management tools (unless you're using SAS) and driver
> reliability. Exact magnitude of the performance gap with Areca is
> somewhat controversial and may depend on OS--FreeBSD performance might
> be better than Linux in particular. Older 3ware cards were really slow.
>
> One of these days I need to wrangle up enough development cash to buy
> current Areca and 3ware cards, an Intel SSD, and disappear into the lab
> (already plenty of drives here) until I've sorted this all out to my
> satisfaction.
... and do I hear you saying that no other vendor is worth considering? Just how far off are they?
Thanks,
Craig
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Schmitz, David | 2009-12-07 22:05:14 | performance penalty between Postgresql 8.3.8 and 8.4.1 |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2009-12-07 21:17:25 | Re: RAID card recommendation |