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

Re: setting up raid10 with more than 4 drives

From: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres(at)mathom(dot)us>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: setting up raid10 with more than 4 drives
Date: 2007-05-30 14:25:59
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 07:06:54AM -0700, Luke Lonergan wrote:
>On 5/30/07 12:29 AM, "Peter Childs" <peterachilds(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Good point, also if you had Raid 1 with 3 drives with some bit errors at least
>> you can take a vote on whats right. Where as if you only have 2 and they
>> disagree how do you know which is right other than pick one and hope... But
>> whatever it will be slower to keep in sync on a heavy write system.
>Much better to get a RAID system that checksums blocks so that "good" is
>known.  Solaris ZFS does that, as do high end systems from EMC and HDS.

I don't see how that's better at all; in fact, it reduces to exactly the 
same problem: given two pieces of data which disagree, which is right?  
The ZFS hashes do a better job of error detection, but that's still not 
the same thing as a voting system (3 copies, 2 of 3 is correct answer) 
to resolve inconsistencies.

Mike Stone

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Luke LonerganDate: 2007-05-30 14:36:48
Subject: Re: setting up raid10 with more than 4 drives
Previous:From: Andrew SullivanDate: 2007-05-30 14:11:04
Subject: Re: Vacuum takes forever

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