| From: | John Philips <johnphilips42(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ben Suffolk <ben(at)vanilla(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Optimizing disk throughput on quad Opteron |
| Date: | 2006-10-23 12:16:37 |
| Message-ID: | 20061023121637.55663.qmail@web57803.mail.re3.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> The thing I would ask is would you not be better
> with SAS drives?
>
> Since the comments on Dell, and the highlighted
> issues I have been
> looking at HP and the the Smart Array P600
> controller with 512 BBWC.
> Although I am looking to stick with the 8 internal
> disks, rather than
> use external ones.
>
> The HP Smart Array 50 is the external array for SAS
> drives. Not
> really looked into it much though.
Ben,
The Smart Array 50 supports a maximum of 10 disks and
has a single I/O module, while the Smart Array 30
supports up to 14 disks and can be configured with a
dual I/O module.
I was under the assumption that SAS runs at the same
speed as Ultra320, in which case the Smart Array 30 is
a better bet...
Thanks for your feedback.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Schaber | 2006-10-23 13:25:49 | Re: Index on two columns not used |
| Previous Message | Markus Schaber | 2006-10-23 09:27:41 | Re: Best COPY Performance |