Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN)

First of all, thank you so much for your valuable time.

It probably does, though we have a requirement of having available at least
twice the expected database size, and 50% of disk space overhead sounds
like too much for us to take in a replicated SAN environment and a
PostgreSQL master/slave - streaming replication setup.

our options regarding disks availability at the moment are:
a 3 disks array dedicated for PostgreSQL in any RAID configuration we'd
like
OR
a 10 disks array shared with 14 virtual machines running the middleware
layer and the application infrastructure in a RAID 5 configuration

again, I do really appreciate your kindly help.

2013/8/28 Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>

> Does your controller support odd number RAID-10 i.e. RAID 1E? If so
> then 3 disks in RAID-1E. Or better 10 disks in 1E
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Rene Romero Benavides
> <rene(dot)romero(dot)b(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Thanks for your attention.
> > What would you choose for a postgresql installation: 3 disks configured
> with
> > RAID 0 (in a self replicating SAN) over 10 disks configured with RAID 5
> > (also in a self replicating SAN) , we have space constraints that
> prohibit
> > us from choosing RAID 1+0.
> > I've been persuaded to choose RAID 5, because writes and parity
> computation
> > will be spread over 10 disks compensating write overhead providing a
> better
> > level of data security.
> >
> > Do you think it was a good decision? Any comment will be appreciated.
> Have a
> > good day.
> >
> > --
> > El genio es 1% inspiración y 99% transpiración.
> > Thomas Alva Edison
> > http://pglearn.blogspot.mx/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.
>

--
El genio es 1% inspiración y 99% transpiración.
Thomas Alva Edison
http://pglearn.blogspot.mx/