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

Re: Hardware recommendations

From: "mark" <dvlhntr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "'Andy'" <angelflow(at)yahoo(dot)com>,"'Marti Raudsepp'" <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"'Benjamin Krajmalnik'" <kraj(at)servoyant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Hardware recommendations
Date: 2010-12-09 05:17:18
Message-ID: 026901cb9760$5b367020$11a35060$@com (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 5:24 PM
To: Marti Raudsepp
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org; Benjamin Krajmalnik
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Hardware recommendations

>> > If you are IO-bound, you might want to consider using
>> SSD.
>> >
>> > A single SSD could easily give you more IOPS than 16
>> 15k SAS in RAID 10.
>> Are there any that don't risk your data on power loss, AND
>> are cheaper
>> than SAS RAID 10?

>Vertex 2 Pro has a built-in supercapacitor to save data on power loss. It's
spec'd at 50K IOPS and a 200GB one costs around $1,000.

Viking offers 6Gbps SAS physical connector SSD drives as well - with a super

I have not seen any official pricing yet, but I would suspect it would be in
the same ballpark.

 I am currently begging to get some for eval. I will let everyone know if I
swing that and can post numbers. 


In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Divakar SinghDate: 2010-12-09 05:17:22
Subject: Re: libpq vs ODBC
Previous:From: Alex GoncharovDate: 2010-12-09 05:01:17
Subject: Re: libpq vs ODBC

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group