| From: | Scott Whitney <scott(at)journyx(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rene Romero Benavides <rene(dot)romero(dot)b(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN) |
| Date: | 2013-08-27 23:18:28 |
| Message-ID: | halhrjspigqsc3kdpqu765qk.1377645502336@email.android.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Never RAID 5 for a database. When I say "never," I can give you edge-case scenarios, but you're basically taking a 4x overhead on all writes. Now, RAID-0 is a bad choice as well, since JBOD has no replication, but it sounds like you might have that end under control.
-------- Original message --------
From: Rene Romero Benavides <rene(dot)romero(dot)b(at)gmail(dot)com>
Date: 08/27/2013 5:35 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: [ADMIN] 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN)
Thanks for your attention.
What would you choose for a postgresql installation: 3 disks configured with RAID 0 (in a self replicating SAN) over 10 disks configured with RAID 5 (also in a self replicating SAN) , we have space constraints that prohibit us from choosing RAID 1+0.
I've been persuaded to choose RAID 5, because writes and parity computation will be spread over 10 disks compensating write overhead providing a better level of data security.
Do you think it was a good decision? Any comment will be appreciated. Have a good day.
--
El genio es 1% inspiración y 99% transpiración.
Thomas Alva Edison
http://pglearn.blogspot.mx/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2013-08-28 00:47:27 | Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN) |
| Previous Message | Rene Romero Benavides | 2013-08-27 22:33:04 | 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN) |