Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D33E8635AFB for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 13:09:18 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 72878-03-4 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 16:09:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:08:59.436002 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail.int.journyx.com (mail.journyx.com [66.219.41.227]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 752BE6361DB for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 13:07:23 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.int.journyx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2958DC4B46; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 10:58:22 -0500 (CDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.int.journyx.com Received: from mail.int.journyx.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.int.journyx.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qLjwh8Hygdmu; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 10:58:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mail.int.journyx.com (zimbra.int.journyx.com [192.168.100.5]) by mail.int.journyx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8967BC4B4F; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 10:58:06 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 10:58:06 -0500 (CDT) From: Scott Whitney Reply-To: Scott Whitney To: "Joshua D. Drake" Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org, fel Message-ID: <24583153.39210.1283875086224.JavaMail.root@zimbra.int.journyx.com> In-Reply-To: <21677689.39198.1283874930742.JavaMail.root@zimbra.int.journyx.com> Subject: Re: [NOVICE] - SAN/NAS/DAS - Need advises MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_39209_2792507.1283875086221" X-Originating-IP: [192.168.100.188] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.6_GA_2331.RHEL4 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/6.0.6_GA_2331.RHEL4) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.909 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201009/55 X-Sequence-Number: 35599 ------=_Part_39209_2792507.1283875086221 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit While I agree with JD, we ended up using a fiber solution through a fiber switch with multi-path drivers (IBM DS4300). It did end up costing a few thousand dollars with all of the drives, but the performance made it worth it. The big thing you want to remember to consider with any storage option is the overall I/O of your storage. A single 5400RPM drive with all of your pgdata on it (as well as the logs, let's say) is going to have serious performance implications that you're not going to have with a RAID10 array of 16 drives, for example. Personally, having been in IT for _quite_ a few years, I'm still very leery of using network-based storage on database servers specifically. I know other people do it quite successfully out there in the world, but I personally neither want nor need my storage communication going over Ethernet (or such). On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 15:03:44 +0200, fel wrote: > Hi all, > > I am working on upgrading my hardware and wondering how Postgres could > work with SAN, NAS and DAS . > Can someone advise me or share experiences ? Unless you want to spend *A LOT* of money, DAS is the way to go. You can get quite a bit of the same functionality without the financial overhead from the use of a volume manager + DAS. JD > > Regards, > Fel -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin ------=_Part_39209_2792507.1283875086221 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <= div style=3D'font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'= >While I agree with JD, we ended up using a fiber solution through a fiber = switch with multi-path drivers (IBM DS4300). It did end up costing a few th= ousand dollars with all of the drives, but the performance made it worth it= .

The big thing you want to remember to consider with any storage op= tion is the overall I/O of your storage. A single 5400RPM drive with all of= your pgdata on it (as well as the logs, let's say) is going to have seriou= s performance implications that you're not going to have with a RAID10 arra= y of 16 drives, for example.

Personally, having been in IT for _quit= e_ a few years, I'm still very leery of using network-based storage on data= base servers specifically. I know other people do it quite successfully out= there in the world, but I personally neither want nor need my storage comm= unication going over Ethernet (or such).



On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 15:03:44 +0200, fel <fellsin@hotmail.com> = wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am working on upgrading my hardwa= re and wondering how Postgres could
> work with SAN, NAS and DAS .> Can someone advise me or share experiences ?

Unless you want = to spend *A LOT* of money, DAS is the way to go. You can
get quite a bit= of the same functionality without the financial overhead
from the use o= f a volume manager + DAS.

JD

>
> Regards,
> F= el

--
PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org=
   Consulting, Development, Support, Training
  = 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
   The PostgreSQ= L Company, serving since 1997

--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing li= st (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin

<= /body> ------=_Part_39209_2792507.1283875086221--