| From: | Vivek Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Pgsql-Performance ((E-mail))" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
| Date: | 2006-05-09 17:57:16 |
| Message-ID: | 5AF87D32-F602-4973-AA21-84E0CFEA1774@khera.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
On May 9, 2006, at 11:51 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Sorry that is an extremely misleading statement. SATA RAID is
> perfectly acceptable if you have a hardware raid controller with a
> battery backup controller.
>
> And dollar for dollar, SCSI will NOT be faster nor have the hard
> drive capacity that you will get with SATA.
Does this hold true still under heavy concurrent-write loads? I'm
preparing yet another big DB server and if SATA is a better option,
I'm all (elephant) ears.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Douglas McNaught | 2006-05-09 18:05:28 | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
| Previous Message | Steve Atkins | 2006-05-09 17:52:45 | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Douglas McNaught | 2006-05-09 18:05:28 | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
| Previous Message | Steve Atkins | 2006-05-09 17:52:45 | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |