| From: | Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vivek Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reliability recommendations |
| Date: | 2006-02-24 16:51:28 |
| Message-ID: | 1140799888.18756.16.camel@state.g2switchworks.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 10:40, Vivek Khera wrote:
> On Feb 24, 2006, at 11:32 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
> > My bad experiences were with the 2600 series machines. We now have
> > some
> > 2800 and they're much better than the 2600/2650s I've used in the
> > past.
>
> Yes, the 2450 and 2650 were CRAP disk performers. I haven't any 2850
> to compare, just an 1850.
>
And the real problem with the 2650s we have now is that under very heavy
load, they just lock up. all of them, latest BIOS updates, etc...
nothing makes them stable. Some things make them a little less dodgy,
but they are never truly reliable. Something the Intel and Supermicro
white boxes have always been for me.
I don't want support from a company like Dell, I want a reliable
machine.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marcos | 2006-02-24 17:06:20 | Re: Creating a correct and real benchmark |
| Previous Message | Vivek Khera | 2006-02-24 16:40:25 | Re: Reliability recommendations |