| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Linos <info(at)linos(dot)es> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: raid10 hard disk choice |
| Date: | 2009-05-21 14:25:32 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150905210725j12dc304dk44e190111601488e@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Linos <info(at)linos(dot)es> wrote:
> Hello,
> i have to buy a new server and in the budget i have (small) i have to
> select one of this two options:
>
> -4 sas 146gb 15k rpm raid10.
> -8 sas 146gb 10k rpm raid10.
>
> The server would not be only dedicated to postgresql but to be a file
> server, the rest of options like plenty of ram and battery backed cache raid
> card are done but this two different hard disk configuration have the same
> price and i am not sure what it is better.
>
> If the best option it is different for postgresql that for a file server i
> would like to know too, thanks.
I would say go with the 10k drives. more space, flexibility (you can
dedicate a volume to WAL), and more total performance on paper. I
would also, if you can afford it and they fit, get two small sata
drives, mount raid 1 and put the o/s on those.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Schnabel | 2009-05-21 14:34:46 | Re: raid10 hard disk choice |
| Previous Message | Matthew Wakeling | 2009-05-21 12:59:20 | Re: raid10 hard disk choice |