Re: Table Partitioning in Postgres:

Most of the specs I've seen haven't shown IDE raid to be that much faster.

2/20/2003 8:02:06 AM, "scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> wrote:

>On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Christopher Browne wrote:
>
>> In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net (Greg
Copeland) transmitted:
>> > While I have read that many expect serial ATA to seriously challenge
>> > SCSI I honestly have no idea where the rhetoric stops and reality
>> > begins. I'd hazard a guess we'll really not know the whole truth until
>> > samples become widely available from multiple sources including drives,
>> > drivers, and host interfaces.
>>
>> I'd see Serial ATA being a "serious challenger" if it allowed you to
>> cheaply build some "embarrassingly-parallel" RAID servers where you
>> were able to get 16 drives hooked up, each on its own ATA 'bus' for
>> about the price of 4-way SCSI.
>>
>> But the intended market is doubtless the super-price-conscious market,
>> which naturally leads to the overall quality of the results being
>> pretty compromised.
>
>These guys:
>
>http://www.ide-raid.com/
>
>will probably make use of serial ata, since they're already making some
>very nice, very fast IDE based RAID devices, and very dense (12 disk 3U
>units.)
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>