Re: dell versus hp
От | Merlin Moncure |
---|---|
Тема | Re: dell versus hp |
Дата | |
Msg-id | b42b73150711131920w636f51d9ua7dd680b14a90b68@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: dell versus hp ("Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Nov 8, 2007 1:22 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote: > Mine too. I would suggest though, that by the time you get to 14 > disks, you switch from RAID-5 to RAID-6 so you have double redundancy. > Performance of a degraded array is better in RAID6 than RAID5, and > you can run your rebuilds much slower since you're still redundant. > couple of remarks here: * personally im not a believer in raid 6, it seems to hurt random write performance which is already a problem with raid 5...I prefer the hot spare route, or raid 10. * the perc 5 sas controller is rebranded lsi megaraid controller with some custom firmware tweaks. for example, the perc 5/e is a rebranded 8408 megaraid iirc. * perc 5 controllers are decent if unspectacular. good raid 5 performance, average raid 10. * to the OP, the 15k solution (dell 2900) will likely perform the best, if you don't mind the rack space. * again the op, you can possibly consider combining the o/s and the wal volumes (2xraid 1 + 6xraid 10) combining the o/s and wal volumes can sometimes also be a win, but doesn't sound likely in your case. merlin merlin
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: