| From: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Alex Turner" <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bucky Jordan" <bjordan(at)lumeta(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as |
| Date: | 2006-09-19 01:14:39 |
| Message-ID: | C134928F.316FC%llonergan@greenplum.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Alex,
On 9/18/06 4:14 PM, "Alex Turner" <armtuk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Be warned, the tech specs page:
> http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4500/specs.xml#anchor3
> doesn't mention RAID 10 as a possible, and this is probably what most would
> recommend for fast data access if you are doing both read and write
> operations. If you are doing mostly Read, then RAID 5 is passable, but it's
> redundancy with large numbers of drives is not so great.
RAID10 works great on the X4500 we get 1.6GB/s + per X4500 using RAID10 in
ZFS. We worked with the Sun Solaris kernel team to make that happen and the
patches are part of Solaris 10 Update 3 due out in November.
- Luke
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-19 02:50:19 | Re: LIKE query problem |
| Previous Message | Luke Lonergan | 2006-09-19 01:10:13 | Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) |