From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Rene Romero Benavides <rene(dot)romero(dot)b(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN) |
Date: | 2013-08-28 00:47:27 |
Message-ID: | CAOR=d=1c6vzarbPO_CJx3KrYChz5bJduexpsUZurhEkkLmhuCw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Does your controller support odd number RAID-10 i.e. RAID 1E? If so
then 3 disks in RAID-1E. Or better 10 disks in 1E
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Rene Romero Benavides
<rene(dot)romero(dot)b(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks for your attention.
> What would you choose for a postgresql installation: 3 disks configured with
> RAID 0 (in a self replicating SAN) over 10 disks configured with RAID 5
> (also in a self replicating SAN) , we have space constraints that prohibit
> us from choosing RAID 1+0.
> I've been persuaded to choose RAID 5, because writes and parity computation
> will be spread over 10 disks compensating write overhead providing a better
> level of data security.
>
> Do you think it was a good decision? Any comment will be appreciated. Have a
> good day.
>
> --
> El genio es 1% inspiración y 99% transpiración.
> Thomas Alva Edison
> http://pglearn.blogspot.mx/
>
--
To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rene Romero Benavides | 2013-08-28 01:18:42 | Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN) |
Previous Message | Scott Whitney | 2013-08-27 23:18:28 | Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN) |