| From: | Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, Michael Ben-Nes <miki(at)epoch(dot)co(dot)il>, PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Integrated perc 5/i |
| Date: | 2007-08-16 19:51:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20070816195110.GO54309@nasby.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 07:59:15PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 10:53:00AM -0700, Luke Lonergan wrote:
> > They have a setting that sounds like RAID10, but it actually
> > implements spanning of mirrors.
>
> That's interesting. I'm pretty sure it actually says "RAID10" in the BIOS,
> but is this a lie?
Unless they use the "plus notation" (ie: RAID 1+0 or RAID 0+1), you
never truly know what you're getting.
BTW, there's other reasons that RAID 0+1 stinks, beyond just
performance.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2007-08-16 22:14:54 | Re: Integrated perc 5/i |
| Previous Message | Frank Schoep | 2007-08-16 19:25:14 | Re: Bad planner decision - bitmap scan instead of index |