| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Anthony Presley <anthony(at)resolution(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: RAID Controller (HP P400) beat by SW-RAID? |
| Date: | 2011-09-12 02:25:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAOR=d=3ORcmuj5iBuQ0tA69SnGOVKu6pLKindccv+dM7VFSkbA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Anthony Presley <anthony(at)resolution(dot)com> wrote:
> We've currently got PG 8.4.4 running on a whitebox hardware set up, with (2)
> 5410 Xeon's, and 16GB of RAM. It's also got (4) 7200RPM SATA drives, using
> the onboard IDE controller and ext3.
> 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
Two issues here. One is that the onboard controller and disks on the
old machine might not be obeying fsync properly, giving a speed boost
at the expense of crash safeness. Two is that the P400 has gotten
pretty horrible performance reviews on this list in the past.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2011-09-12 02:28:06 | Re: Postgres for a "data warehouse", 5-10 TB |
| Previous Message | Alan Hodgson | 2011-09-12 02:12:16 | Re: RAID Controller (HP P400) beat by SW-RAID? |