Re: 3ware vs Areca

From: "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org>
Cc: "Pgsql performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 3ware vs Areca
Date: 2008-07-11 14:19:50
Message-ID: dcc563d10807110719qfd41e2ej6bd6b89654f4c995@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 7:26 AM, Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org> wrote:
> I've got a couple boxes with some 3ware 9550 controllers, and I'm less than
> pleased with performance on them.. Sequential access is nice, but start
> seeking around and you kick it in the gut. (I've found posts on the
> internets about others having similar issues). My last box with a 3ware I
> simply had it in jbod mode and used sw raid and it smoked the hw.
> Anyway, anybody have experience in 3ware vs Areca - I've heard plenty of
> good anecdotal things that Areca is much better, just wondering if anybody
> here has firsthand experience. It'll be plugged into about 8 10k rpm sata
> disks.

What RAID level are you using? How much cache do you have? Write
back / battery backed? What OS and version?

Everything I've heard sys they're both fast performers.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-07-11 14:27:34 Re: Altering a column type - Most efficient way
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-07-11 13:44:23 Re: Altering a column type - Most efficient way