Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: david(at)lang(dot)hm, Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com>, Pgsql performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics
Date: 2010-03-03 00:36:35
Message-ID: dcc563d11003021636p4dc8e7ccnb9cb5d8a29062a34@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>
>> True, I just looked at the Hitachi 7200 RPM 2TB Ultrastar and it lists
>> and average throughput of 134 Megabytes/second which is quite good.
>>
>
> Yeah, but have you tracked the reliability of any of the 2TB drives out
> there right now?  They're terrible.  I wouldn't deploy anything more than a
> 1TB drive right now in a server, everything with a higher capacity is still
> on the "too new to be stable yet" side of the fence to me.

We've had REAL good luck with the WD green and black drives. Out of
about 35 or so drives we've had two failures in the last year, one of
each black and green. The Seagate SATA drives have been horrific for
us, with a 30% failure rate in the last 8 or so months. We only have
something like 10 of the Seagates, so the sample's not as big as the
WDs. Note that we only use the supposed "enterprise" class drives
from each manufacturer.

We just got a shipment of 8 1.5TB Seagates so I'll keep you informed
of the failure rate of those drives. Wouldn't be surprised to see 1
or 2 die in the first few months tho.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2010-03-03 01:03:39 Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics
Previous Message Greg Smith 2010-03-02 23:57:19 Re: 10K vs 15k rpm for analytics