| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Miguel <mmiranda(at)123(dot)com(dot)sv>, Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Best OS & Configuration for Dual Xeon w/4GB & |
| Date: | 2006-03-21 17:59:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20060321175900.GH15742@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 07:25:07AM -0800, Luke Lonergan wrote:
> Jim,
>
> On 3/21/06 3:49 AM, "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > No, I don't know why the transfer rates for the mirror are 1/2 that as the raw
> > device. :(
>
> Well - lessee. Would those drives be attached to a Silicon Image (SII) SATA
> controller? A Highpoint?
>
> I found in testing about 2 years ago that under Linux (looks like you're
> BSD), most SATA controllers other than the Intel PIIX are horribly broken
> from a performance standpoint, probably due to bad drivers but I'm not sure.
>
> Now I think whatever is commonly used by Nforce 4 implementations seems to
> work ok, but we don't count on them for RAID configurations yet.
atapci1: <nVidia nForce4 SATA150 controller>
And note that this is using FreeBSD gmirror, not the built-in raid
controller.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fernando Lujan | 2006-03-21 18:08:07 | Sequence Scan vs. Index scan |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-03-21 17:49:03 | Re: planner with index scan cost way off actual cost, |