Re: RAID Controller (HP P400) beat by SW-RAID?

From: Anthony Presley <anthony(at)timeforge(dot)com>
To: Arjen van der Meijden <acmmailing(at)tweakers(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RAID Controller (HP P400) beat by SW-RAID?
Date: 2011-09-13 11:33:46
Message-ID: CAO2Axyog=K0gCB5BcKxLCxGm_6Fn01zi_9yO6h1AW+h47o93Mw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Arjen van der Meijden <
acmmailing(at)tweakers(dot)net> wrote:

>
> On 12-9-2011 0:44 Anthony Presley wrote:
>
>> A few weeks back, we purchased two refurb'd HP DL360's G5's, and were
>> hoping to set them up with PG 9.0.2, running replicated. These machines
>> have (2) 5410 Xeon's, 36GB of RAM, (6) 10k SAS drives, and are using the
>> HP SA P400i with 512MB of BBWC. PG is running on an ext4 (noatime)
>> partition, and they drives configured as RAID 1+0 (seems with this
>> controller, I cannot do JBOD).
>>
>
> If you really want a JBOD-setup, you can try a RAID0 for each available
> disk, i.e. in your case 6 separate RAID0's. That's how we configured our
> Dell H700 - which doesn't offer JBOD as well - for ZFS.
>

That's a pretty good idea ... I'll try that on our second server today. In
the meantime, after tweaking it a bit, we were able to get (with iozone):

Old New Initial write
75.85 220.68 Rewrite
63.95 253.07 Read
45.04 171.35 Re-read
45 2405.23 Random read
27.56 1733.46 Random write
50.7 239.47

Not as fas as I'd like, but faster than the old disks, for sure.

--
Anthony

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Anthony Presley 2011-09-13 11:56:19 PG 9.x prefers slower Hash Joins?
Previous Message Arjen van der Meijden 2011-09-13 06:22:03 Re: RAID Controller (HP P400) beat by SW-RAID?