Re: New server setup

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Rick Otten <rotten(at)manta(dot)com>
Cc: postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New server setup
Date: 2013-03-15 19:14:17
Message-ID: CAOR=d=1cNE2-+QFFe53iOrvW4oTRABvmaB6AzHDM7mK=GAVL_w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Rick Otten <rotten(at)manta(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I not convinced about the need for BBU with SSD - you *can* use them
>>> without one, just need to make sure about suitable longevity and also
>>> the presence of (proven) power off protection (as discussed
>>> previously). It is worth noting that using unproven or SSD known to be
>>> lacking power off protection with a BBU will *not* save you from
>>> massive corruption (or device failure) upon unexpected power loss.
>
>>I don't think any drive that corrupts on power-off is suitable for a database, but for non-db uses, sure, I guess they are OK, though you have to be pretty money->constrainted to like that tradeoff.
>
> Wouldn't mission critical databases normally be configured in a high availability cluster - presumably with replicas running on different power sources?

I've worked in high end data centers where certain failures resulted
in ALL power being lost. more than once. Relying on never losing
power to keep your data from getting corrupted is not a good idea. Now
if they're geographically separate you're maybe ok.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Kirkwood 2013-03-16 08:47:34 Re: New server setup
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2013-03-15 18:55:08 Re: New server setup