From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | A B <gentosaker(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: hardware for a server |
Date: | 2010-03-16 07:38:11 |
Message-ID: | 4B9F3563.9090001@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
>
>> Given what you've said about your budget here, I suspect that you're
>> heading toward either 3ware or LSI and all SATA drives. I wouldn't
>> expect that big of a performance difference between the two with only 8
>> drives on there. If you had 24, the 3ware controller would likely turn
>> into the bottleneck, and if this was an all SAS system the LSI one would
>> also be the only sensible choice. (Make sure you get the right battery
>> included with whatever controller you pick)
>>
>
> Is this documented somewhere, like on our wiki? It seems we have a
> clear consensus on this and we should document this.
>
The documentation we do have on the wiki in this area is out of date:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SCSI_vs._IDE/SATA_Disks
I just finished testing a bunch of LSI card recently enough that I
haven't gotten to fixing the outdated info on there yet about that company.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.us
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2010-03-16 07:51:49 | Re: hardware for a server |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2010-03-16 07:33:43 | Re: hardware for a server |