Re: SAN performance mystery
От | Mark Kirkwood |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SAN performance mystery |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 44973053.4080906@paradise.net.nz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SAN performance mystery (Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Michael Stone wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 08:09:47PM +1000, Tim Allen wrote: >> Certainly, the read performance of the SATA disk still beats the SAN, >> and there is no way to lie about read performance. > > Sure there is: you have the data cached in system RAM. I find it real > hard to believe that you can sustain 161MB/s off a single SATA disk. > Agreed - approx 60-70Mb/s seems to be the ballpark for modern SATA drives, so get get 161Mb/s you would need about 3 of them striped together (or a partially cached file as indicated). What is interesting is that (presumably) the same test is getting such uninspiring results on the SAN... Having said that, I've been there too, about 4 years ago with a SAN that had several 6 disk RAID5 arrays, and the best sequential *read* performance we ever saw from them was about 50Mb/s. I recall trying to get performance data from the vendor - only to be told that if we were doing benchmarks - could they have our results when we were finished! regards Mark
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: