Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

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

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
Cc: <alex(at)neteconomist(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?
Date: 2005-03-28 20:09:29
Message-ID: 8764zb353a.fsf@stark.xeocode.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
"Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> writes:

> Alex wrote:
> > Without starting too much controvesy I hope, I would seriously
> > recommend you evaluate the AMCC Escalade 9500S SATA controller.  
...
> At the risk of shaming myself with another 'me too' post, I'd like to
> say that my experiences back this up 100%.  The Escalade controllers are
> excellent and the Raptor drives are fast and reliable (so far).  
...

I assume AMCC == 3ware now?

Has anyone verified that fsync is safe on these controllers? Ie, that they
aren't caching writes and "lying" about the write completing like IDE
drives often do by default?

-- 
greg


In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2005-03-28 20:57:08
Subject: Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?
Previous:From: Karim A NassarDate: 2005-03-28 20:03:12
Subject: Re: Delete query takes exorbitant amount of time

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group