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

Re: [GENERAL] Re: server hardware recommendations

From: Adriaan Joubert <a(dot)joubert(at)albourne(dot)com>
To: Marc Tardif <admin(at)wtbwts(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Re: server hardware recommendations
Date: 2000-01-26 06:37:50
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-general
Marc Tardif wrote:

> Now I'm back to square one, looking for a storage solution for my
> postgresql db. More specifically, something scallable and very fast. In my
> reading, I found that raid5 could also fail and that a tape backup is
> always recommended. Therefore, I would think raid 0 or 1 or 0+1 could do
> just fine having a tape backup as fault tolerance. As for a software or
> hardware implementation, opinions vary. Marc G. Fournier seems to prefer
> the software solution while there are many people preaching the benefits
> of hardware raid out there. But the question remains, how can all this be
> scallable, ie how can I expand on existing storage space.

On our Digital RAID array you plug in another disk and you tell it to use it.
But then, the RAID array is a workstation in its own right, and runs its own
operating system. When it comes to RAID I think it is still a matter of you
get what you pay for. And yes, we always back up onto DLT (haven't had any
failure in the 2 years we've had it though). And we run Digital Unix which is
still miles better than any of the free operating systems, especially under
heavy load.


In response to

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Chairudin Sentosa HarjoDate: 2000-01-26 06:59:35
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Query time is too long for netscape
Previous:From: Peter MountDate: 2000-01-26 01:50:43
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] JDBC 2.0

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