Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Hosted servers with good DB disk performance?

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Hosted servers with good DB disk performance?
Date: 2009-05-27 02:35:42
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Scott Carey <scott(at)richrelevance(dot)com> wrote:

>> Yeah, the OP would be much better served ordering a server with an
>> Areca or Escalade / 3ware controller setup and ready to go, shipped to
>> the hosting center and sshing in and doing the rest than letting a
>> hosted solution company try to compete.  You can get a nice 16x15K SAS
>> disk machine with an Areca controller, dual QC cpus, and 16 to 32 gig
>> ram for $6000 to $8000 ready to go.  We've since repurposed our Dell /
>> PERC machines as file servers and left the real database server work
>> to our aberdeen machines.  Trying to wring reasonable performance out
>> of most Dell servers is a testament to frustration.
> For a permanent server, yes.  But for a sort lease?  You have to go with
> what is easily available for lease, or work out something with a provider
> where they buy the HW from you and manage/lease it back (some do this, but
> all I've ever heard of involved 12+ servers to do so and sign on for 1 or 2
> years).

True, but given the low cost of a high drive count machine with spares
etc you can come away spending a lot less than by leasing.

> Expecting full I/O performance out of a DELL with a PERC is not really
> possible, but maybe that's not as important as a certain pricing model or
> the flexibility?  That is really an independent business decision.

True.  Plus if you only need 4 drives or something, you can do pretty
well with a Dell with the RAID controller turned to JBOD and letting
the linux kernel do the RAID work.

> I'll also but a caveat to the '3ware' above -- the last few I've used were
> slower than the PERC (9650 series versus PERC6, 9550 versus PERC5  -- all
> tests with 12 SATA drives raid 10).
> I have no experience with the 3ware 9690 series (SAS) though -- those might
> be just fine.

My experience is primarily with Areca 1100, 1200, and 1600 series
controllers, but others on the list have done well with 3ware
controllers.  We have an 8 port 11xx series areca card at work running
RAID-6 as a multipurpose server, and it's really quite fast and well
behaved for sequential throughput.  But the 16xx series cards stomp
the 11xx series in the ground for random IOPS.

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Greg SmithDate: 2009-05-27 03:23:56
Subject: Re: Hosted servers with good DB disk performance?
Previous:From: Scott CareyDate: 2009-05-27 02:31:34
Subject: Re: Hosted servers with good DB disk performance?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group