| From: | Iñigo Martinez Lasala <imartinez(at)vectorsf(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Anj Adu <fotographs(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: more 10K disks or less 15K disks |
| Date: | 2010-04-28 20:29:14 |
| Message-ID: | 1272486554.16259.73.camel@deimos |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Supposing a 50% performance increase disk-by-disk with 15.000rpm vs
10.000rpm you would get better performance (100%) by doubling number of
disks versus using 15K rpm disk (50%).
However, you have to check other parameters, for example, if your RAID
controller can deal with such a high bandwidth or the disk cache size.
Do you have benchmarks about these hard disk models ?
How about using SSD? ;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Anj Adu <fotographs(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: [ADMIN] more 10K disks or less 15K disks
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 11:27:26 -0700
I am faced with a hardware choice for a postgres data warehouse
(extremely high volume inserts..over 200 million records a day) with a
total storage of either
12 x 600G disks (15K) (the new Dell Poweredge C server)
or
24 x 600G (10K disks)
ALL direct attached storage.
I am leaning toward the 24 disks as I expect the higher number of
disks to provide overall better performance under high loads
Does anyone have any experience with a mixed 10K / 15K DAS storage
that you can share.
Thank you
Sriram
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Campbell, Lance | 2010-04-28 20:37:06 | Error in PostgreSQL log |
| Previous Message | Evan Rempel | 2010-04-28 20:21:51 | Re: more 10K disks or less 15K disks |