On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 07:06:54AM -0700, Luke Lonergan wrote:
>On 5/30/07 12:29 AM, "Peter Childs" <peterachilds(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Good point, also if you had Raid 1 with 3 drives with some bit errors at least
>> you can take a vote on whats right. Where as if you only have 2 and they
>> disagree how do you know which is right other than pick one and hope... But
>> whatever it will be slower to keep in sync on a heavy write system.
>Much better to get a RAID system that checksums blocks so that "good" is
>known. Solaris ZFS does that, as do high end systems from EMC and HDS.
I don't see how that's better at all; in fact, it reduces to exactly the
same problem: given two pieces of data which disagree, which is right?
The ZFS hashes do a better job of error detection, but that's still not
the same thing as a voting system (3 copies, 2 of 3 is correct answer)
to resolve inconsistencies.
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Luke Lonergan||Date: 2007-05-30 14:36:48|
|Subject: Re: setting up raid10 with more than 4 drives|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Sullivan||Date: 2007-05-30 14:11:04|
|Subject: Re: Vacuum takes forever|