Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>, alex(at)neteconomist(dot)com, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?
Date: 2005-03-29 00:51:01
Message-ID: 87oed31dhm.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

> I asked 3ware this at the Linuxworld Boston show and they said their
> controller keeps the information in cache until they are sure it is on
> the platters and not just in the disk cache, but that is far from a 100%
> reliable report.

Hm. Well, keeping it in cache is one thing. But what it needs to do is not
confirm the write to the host OS. Unless they want to sell their battery
backed unit which is an expensive add-on...

--
greg

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kris Jurka 2005-03-29 02:52:36 Re: JDBC best practice
Previous Message Klint Gore 2005-03-29 00:40:45 Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?