| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Douglas McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Vivek Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>, "Pgsql-Performance ((E-mail))" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
| Date: | 2006-05-10 04:41:20 |
| Message-ID: | 8764kexzin.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
Douglas McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org> writes:
> Vivek Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org> writes:
>
> > On May 9, 2006, at 11:51 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >
> >> And dollar for dollar, SCSI will NOT be faster nor have the hard
> >> drive capacity that you will get with SATA.
> >
> > Does this hold true still under heavy concurrent-write loads? I'm
> > preparing yet another big DB server and if SATA is a better option,
> > I'm all (elephant) ears.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never heard of a 15kRPM SATA drive.
Well, dollar for dollar you would get the best performance from slower drives
anyways since it would give you more spindles. 15kRPM drives are *expensive*.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2006-05-10 04:50:28 | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-10 04:37:19 | Re: Preventing SQL Injection in PL/pgSQL in psql |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2006-05-10 04:50:28 | Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
| Previous Message | Rudi Starcevic | 2006-05-10 04:18:15 | Re: VACUUM killing my CPU |