Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
Cc: <alex(at)neteconomist(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?
Date: 2005-03-28 20:09:29
Message-ID: 8764zb353a.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


"Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> writes:

> Alex wrote:
> > Without starting too much controvesy I hope, I would seriously
> > recommend you evaluate the AMCC Escalade 9500S SATA controller.
...
> At the risk of shaming myself with another 'me too' post, I'd like to
> say that my experiences back this up 100%. The Escalade controllers are
> excellent and the Raptor drives are fast and reliable (so far).
...

I assume AMCC == 3ware now?

Has anyone verified that fsync is safe on these controllers? Ie, that they
aren't caching writes and "lying" about the write completing like IDE
drives often do by default?

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2005-03-28 20:57:08 Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?
Previous Message Karim A Nassar 2005-03-28 20:03:12 Re: Delete query takes exorbitant amount of time