| From: | Alex Turner <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Boreham <david_list(at)boreham(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( |
| Date: | 2005-11-17 19:50:10 |
| Message-ID: | 33c6269f0511171150j24f2dd2bq607b69994338aa9@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Just pick up a SCSI drive and a consumer ATA drive.
Feel their weight.
You don't have to look inside to tell the difference.
Alex
On 11/16/05, David Boreham <david_list(at)boreham(dot)org> wrote:
>
>
> I suggest you read this on the difference between enterprise/SCSI and
> desktop/IDE drives:
>
> http://www.seagate.com/content/docs/pdf/whitepaper/D2c_More_than_Interface_ATA_vs_SCSI_042003.pdf
>
>
> This is exactly the kind of vendor propaganda I was talking about
> and it proves my point quite well : that there's nothing specific relating
> to reliability that is different between SCSI and SATA drives cited in that
> paper.
> It does have a bunch of FUD such as 'oh yeah we do a lot more
> drive characterization during manufacturing'.
>
>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alex Turner | 2005-11-17 19:54:54 | Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( |
| Previous Message | Alex Turner | 2005-11-17 19:48:38 | Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( |