| From: | Tomka Gergely <tomka(at)zeus(dot)gau(dot)hu> |
|---|---|
| To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com>, psql performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Tests |
| Date: | 2003-08-25 15:27:32 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0308251724481.31338-100000@zeus.gau.hu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
2003-08-25 ragyogó napján scott.marlowe ezt üzente:
> On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> > Also another test I'd really like to see is hardware raid (Adaptec, LSI)
> > against Linux software raid, and 5-disk RAID 5 against 4-disk RAID 1+0.
>
> It would be nice to cross those, so you have RAID5 sw vs RAID5 hw, vs
> RAID1+0 sw vs RAID1+0 hw.
>
> Now if only I had the hardware. Time to scrounge.
Hm.
At first, now we dont have raid hardware, sorry.
Second, in my practice the harware raid slower than sw raid, because now
the cheapest computing power is the cpu. So i dont like hardware raid
solutions, and even on ibm pc-servers i try not using them.
--
Tomka Gergely
"S most - vajon barbárok nélkül mi lesz velünk?
Ők mégiscsak megoldás voltak valahogy..."
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2003-08-25 15:44:43 | Re: Query too slow |
| Previous Message | Bill Moran | 2003-08-25 15:23:08 | Re: Tests |