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

Re: Perc 3 DC

From: "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Glyn Astill" <glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "Steve Clark" <sclark(at)netwolves(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Perc 3 DC
Date: 2008-11-24 15:18:18
Message-ID: dcc563d10811240718g3fa2e90cja576f422aab0be97@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:06 AM, Glyn Astill <glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk> wrote:
> --- Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > Yeah the battery is on there, and in the BIOS it says it's
>> "PRESENT" and the status is "GOOD".
>>
>> If I remember correctly, older LSI cards had pretty poor
>> performance
>> in RAID 1+0 (or any layered RAID really).  Have you tried setting
>> up
>> RAID-1 pairs on the card and then striping them with the OS?
>>
>
> Not yet no, but that's a good suggestion and I do intend to give it a
> whirl.  I get about 27MB/s from raid 1 (10 is about the same) so
> hopefully I can up the throughput to the speed of about one disk with
> sw raid.
>
> For kicks I did try raid 5 on it; 6.9MB/s made it hard to resist
> going to get the hammer, which is still a very attractive option.

Well, I prefer making keychain fobs still, but from a technical
perspective, I guess either option is a good one.

Srsly, also look at running pure sw RAID on it with the controller
providing caching only.  I don't expect a PERC 3DC to win any awards,
but the less you give that card to do the better off you'll be.

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Simon WatersDate: 2008-11-24 15:41:43
Subject: Re: Perc 3 DC
Previous:From: Glyn AstillDate: 2008-11-24 15:06:02
Subject: Re: Perc 3 DC

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