Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected)
От | Alex Turner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as expected) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 33c6269f0609182040m28ac1e0ei34f617957ac3227a@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as ("Luke Lonergan" <llonergan@greenplum.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Large tables (was: RAID 0 not as fast as
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Sweet - thats good - RAID 10 support seems like an odd thing to leave out.
Alex
Alex
On 9/18/06, Luke Lonergan < llonergan@greenplum.com> wrote:
Alex,
On 9/18/06 4:14 PM, "Alex Turner" < armtuk@gmail.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
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: