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

Re: SAN vs Internal Disks

From: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres(at)mathom(dot)us>
To: Tobias Brox <tobias(at)nordicbet(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SAN vs Internal Disks
Date: 2007-09-07 13:16:03
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:33:41PM +0200, Tobias Brox wrote:
> 1. Higher I/O (at least the salesman claims so)

Benchmark it. It is extremely unlikely that you'll get I/O *as good as* 
DAS at a similar price point. 

> 2. Easier to upgrade the disk capacity

Is this an issue? You may find that you can simply get dramatically more 
space for the money with DAS and not have to worry about an upgrade. 
Also, you can use the postgres tablespace functionality to migrate data 
to a new partition fairly transparently.

> 3. Easy to set up "warm standby" functionality.  (Then again, if the
> postgres server fails miserably, it's likely to be due to a disk
> crash).

You may find that using db replication will gain you even more 
reliability for less money.

>Also, my boss states that "all big enterprises uses SAN nowadays".

Use SAN *for what*?

Mike Stone

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-09-07 14:56:47
Subject: Re: postgres memory management issues?
Previous:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2007-09-07 12:56:15
Subject: Re: DRBD and Postgres: how to improve the perfomance?

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