| From: | "Gurgel, Flavio" <flavio(at)4linux(dot)com(dot)br> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Ing(dot) Marcos Ortiz Valmaseda" <mlortiz(at)uci(dot)cu> |
| Subject: | Re: RAID card recommendation |
| Date: | 2009-11-24 21:08:12 |
| Message-ID: | 28683160.121141259096891567.JavaMail.root@mail.4linux.com.br |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
----- "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> escreveu:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Ing. Marcos Ortiz Valmaseda
> <mlortiz(at)uci(dot)cu> wrote:
> > Do you expose that performance issued caused by RAID 5? Because this
> is one
> > of our solutions here on my country to save the data of our
> PostgreSQL
> > database. Which model do you recommend ? RAID 0,RAID 1, RAID 5 or
> RAID 10?
>
> RAID-1 or RAID-10 are the default, mostly safe choices.
>
> For disposable dbs, RAID-0 is fine.
>
> For very large dbs with very little writing and mostly reading and on
> a budget, RAID-6 is ok.
>
> In most instances I never recommend RAID-5 anymore.
I would never recommend RAID-5 for database customers (any database system), some of the current ones are using it and the worst nightmares in disk performance are related to RAID-5.
As Scott said, RAID-1 is safe, RAID-0 is fast (and accept more request load too), RAID-10 is a great combination of both worlds.
Flavio Henrique A. Gurgel
Consultor -- 4Linux
tel. 55-11-2125.4765
fax. 55-11-2125.4777
www.4linux.com.br
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2009-11-24 21:34:00 | Re: RAID card recommendation |
| Previous Message | Jochen Erwied | 2009-11-24 20:59:04 | Re: RAID card recommendation |