Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(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: 2005-11-16 15:47:53
Message-ID: 437B54A9.5070104@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>
> I guess I've never bought into the vendor story that there are
> two reliability grades. Why would they bother making two
> different kinds of bearing, motor etc ? Seems like it's more
> likely an excuse to justify higher prices. In my experience the
> expensive SCSI drives I own break frequently while the cheapo
> desktop drives just keep chunking along (modulo certain products
> that have a specific known reliability problem).

I don't know if the reliability grade is true or not but what I can tell
you is that I have scsi drives that are 5+ years old that still work without
issue.

I have never had an IDE drive last longer than 3 years (when used in
production).

That being said, so what. That is what raid is for. You loose a drive
and hot swap
it back in. Heck keep a hotspare in the trays.

Joshua D. Drake

>
> I'd expect that a larger number of hotter drives will give a less
> reliable
> system than a smaller number of cooler ones.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Boreham 2005-11-16 16:00:12 Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Previous Message Douglas J. Trainor 2005-11-16 15:45:15 OT Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (