Re: Opinions on Raid
От | Stefan Kaltenbrunner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Opinions on Raid |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 45E43878.5000305@kaltenbrunner.cc обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Opinions on Raid ("Joe Uhl" <joeuhl@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Joe Uhl wrote: > We have been running Postgres on a 2U server with 2 disks configured in > raid 1 for the os and logs and 4 disks configured in raid 10 for the > data. I have since been told raid 5 would have been a better option > given our usage of Dell equipment and the way they handle raid 10. I > have just a few general questions about raid with respect to Postgres: > > [1] What is the performance penalty of software raid over hardware raid? > Is it truly significant? We will be working with 100s of GB to 1-2 TB > of data eventually. this depends a lot on the raidcontroller (whether it has or not BBWC for example) - for some use-cases softwareraid is actually faster(especially for seq-io tests). > > [2] How do people on this list monitor their hardware raid? Thus far we > have used Dell and the only way to easily monitor disk status is to use > their openmanage application. Do other controllers offer easier means > of monitoring individual disks in a raid configuration? It seems one > advantage software raid has is the ease of monitoring. well the answer to that question depends on what you are using for your network monitoring as a whole as well as your Platform of choice. If you use say nagios and Linux it makes sense to use a nagios plugin (we do that here with a unified check script that checks everything from LSI-MPT based raid cards, over IBMs ServeRAID, HPs Smartarray,LSI MegaRAID cards and also Linux/Solaris Software RAID). If you are using another monitoring solution(OpenView, IBM Directory,...) your solution might look different. Stefan
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: