From: | Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jeff <threshar(at)threshar(dot)is-a-geek(dot)com>, Pgsql performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 3ware vs Areca |
Date: | 2008-07-11 19:58:56 |
Message-ID: | E38C3699-881E-40AB-8E99-D48A5DC0CB67@torgo.978.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Jul 11, 2008, at 3:21 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>> My last box with a 3ware I simply had it in jbod mode and used sw
>> raid and it smoked the hw.
>
> That is often the case no matter which hardware controller you've
> got, particularly in more complicated RAID setups. You might want
> to consider that a larger lesson rather than just a single data point.
>
Yeah, it'd be fun to run more benchmarks, but the beefy box, for some
reason, is a prod box busy 24/7. no time to nuke it and fidgit :)
> Check out the pages starting at http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/
> SERIAL-RAID-CONTROLLERS-AMCC,1738-12.html for example, where the
> newer Areca 1680ML card just gets crushed at all kinds of workloads
> by the AMCC 3ware 9690SA. I think the 3ware 9600 series cards have
> achieved or exceeded what Areca's 1200 series was capable of, while
> Areca's latest generation has slipped a bit from the previous one.
>
It does look like the 9600 series fixed a lot of the 9550 issues.
(and for the record, yes, either card I get will have a bbu. tis
silly to get a controller without one)
--
Jeff Trout <jeff(at)jefftrout(dot)com>
http://www.stuarthamm.net/
http://www.dellsmartexitin.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Campbell, Lance | 2008-07-11 21:25:53 | How many inserts am I doing |
Previous Message | Jeff | 2008-07-11 19:52:02 | Re: 3ware vs Areca |