Re: Intel SRCS16 SATA raid?
От | Mohan, Ross |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Intel SRCS16 SATA raid? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CC74E7E10A8A054798B6611BD1FEF4D30625DA59@vamail01.thexchange.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Intel SRCS16 SATA raid? (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: Intel SRCS16 SATA raid?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
sorry, don't remember whether it's SCSI or SATA II, but IIRC the Areca controllers are just stellar for things. If you do get SATA for db stuff..especially multiuser...i still haven't seen anything to indicate an across-the-board primacy for SATA over SCSI. I'd go w/SCSI, or if SATA for $$$ reasons, I'd be sure to have many spindles and RAID 10. my 0.02. I'm surely not an expert of any kind. -----Original Message----- From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Greg Stark Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 10:55 AM To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: [PERFORM] Intel SRCS16 SATA raid? Our vendor is trying to sell us on an Intel SRCS16 SATA raid controller instead of the 3ware one. Poking around it seems this does come with Linux drivers and there is a battery backup option. So it doesn't seem to be completelyinsane. Anyone have any experience with these controllers? I'm also wondering about whether I'm better off with one of these SATA raid controllers or just going with SCSI drives. -- greg ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: