Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?

Without starting too much controvesy I hope, I would seriously
recommend you evaluate the AMCC Escalade 9500S SATA controller. It
has many of the features of a SCSI controler, but works with cheaper
drives, and for half the price or many SCSI controlers (9500S-8MI goes
for abour $500). See http://plexq.com/~aturner/3ware.pdf for their 4
way, 8 way and 12 way RAID benchmarks including RAID 0, RAID 5 and
RAID 10. If others have similar data, I would be very interested to
see how it stacks up against other RAID controllers.

Alex Turner
NetEconomist

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 16:52:42 +1100, Benjamin Wragg <bwragg(at)tpg(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From what I've been reading on the list for the last few months, adaptec
> isn't that good when it comes to RAID controllers, but LSI keeps popping up.
> Is there any particual models that are recommended as I'm in the market for
> two new servers both with RAID controllers. The server specs I'm thinking
> are as follows:
>
> Box 1
> Fedora 64bit core 3
> 4 GB RAM (2GB per CPU)
> 2 x Opteron CPU ???
> Tyan K8S
> LSI® 53C1030 U320 SCSI controller Dual-channel
>
> Box 2
> Fedora 64bit core 3
> 2 GB RAM (1GB per CPU)
> 2 x Opteron CPU ???
> Tyan K8S
> LSI® 53C1030 U320 SCSI controller Dual-channel
>
> This motherboard has can "Connects to PCI-X Bridge A, LSI® ZCR (Zero Channel
> RAID) support (SCSI Interface Steering Logic)". I believe this means I can
> get a LSI MegaRAID 320-0 which a few have mentioned on the list
> (http://www.lsilogic.com/products/megaraid/scsi_320_0.html). It supports
> RAID 10 and supports battery backed cache. Anyone had any experience with
> this?
>
> Any other particular controller that people recommend? From what I've been
> reading RAID 10 and battery backed cache sound like things I need. :)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Benjamin Wragg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Josh Berkus
> Sent: Tuesday, 11 January 2005 5:35 PM
> To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Cc: Christopher Browne
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?
>
> Chris,
>
> > I don't know so much about FreeBSD's handling of this, but on Linux,
> > there's pretty strong indication that _SOFTWARE_ RAID is faster than
> > hardware RAID.
>
> Certainly better than an Adaptec. But not necessarily better than a
> medium-end RAID card, like an LSI. It really depends on the quality of the
> controller.
>
> Also, expected concurrent activity should influence you. On a dedicated
> database server, you'll seldom max out the CPU but will often max of the
> disk, so the CPU required by software RAID is "free". However, if you have
>
> a Web/PG/E-mail box which frequently hits 100% CPU, then even a lower-end
> RAID card can be beneficial simply by taking load off the CPU.
>
> --
> Josh Berkus
> Aglio Database Solutions
> San Francisco
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 10/01/2005
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.11 - Release Date: 12/01/2005
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>