| From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk |
| Cc: | "Stefano Nichele" <stefano(dot)nichele(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks |
| Date: | 2009-01-07 23:43:15 |
| Message-ID: | dcc563d10901071543k4dd3ab52u351689dcf9590160@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Glyn Astill <glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk> wrote:
> --- On Wed, 7/1/09, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Just to elaborate on the horror that is a Dell perc5e. We
>> have one in
>> a 1950 with battery backed cache (256 Meg I think). It has
>> an 8 disk
>> 500Gig SATA drive RAID-10 array and 4 1.6GHz cpus and 10
>> Gigs ram.
>
> Our perc5i controllers performed better in raid 5 that 10. Sounds like the comment you made when I was wasting my time with that perc3 fits all dell cards perfectly; "brain damaged"
One of the beauties of the whole Dell RAID card naming scheme is that
a Perc5i and a Perc5e can be made by different manufacturers and have
completely different performance characteristics. The only common
factor seems to be the high level of suck they managed to generate.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bborie Park | 2009-01-07 23:51:29 | Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks |
| Previous Message | Glyn Astill | 2009-01-07 23:36:51 | Re: understanding postgres issues/bottlenecks |