DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer
	:thread-index:content-language;
	b=DF4MgdjkId7zFAFcoCeE3QC1Q0I3vVEIdlQDuRYGyGoPf4pCTqszhosgViUHX9x9nJ
	l3WxNOS1FBe4w9qC7Hqd19+jLRAPGEaYQlCtvZtupWMMHPDTdDAnSfw4Fc1MbtN00n1r
	KSN5iYEuSnghmeeaxpRegTy4nbJSVUIlzTDpE=
From: "mark" <dvlhntr@gmail.com>
To: "'Scott Marlowe'" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Glyn Astill'" <glynastill@yahoo.co.uk>,
	"'Kevin Grittner'" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>,
	"'Joshua D. Drake'" <jd@commandprompt.com>,
	<pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
References: <8b76c51ad6db2e458431ef73bcdd2759@commandprompt.com>
	<895662.51387.qm@web26005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTik2+T3xmpStJNVxWzXQWgxU14bVeA@mail.gmail.com>
	<028401cbf8a5$5260f7d0$f722e770$@com>
	<BANLkTikDyGKqzP4Q8dLb6Q2wyNd4NKjfyQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikDyGKqzP4Q8dLb6Q2wyNd4NKjfyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Linux: more cores = less concurrency.
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:50:32 -0600
Message-ID: <028501cbf8ab$a1db48f0$e591dad0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Index: Acv4pxXZhrFJOf3cS/+qXbJ4DJEj/AAA2Tjw
Content-Language: en-us


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Marlowe [mailto:scott.marlowe@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 6:18 PM
> To: mark
> Cc: Glyn Astill; Kevin Grittner; Joshua D. Drake; pgsql-
> performance@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Linux: more cores = less concurrency.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 6:05 PM, mark <dvlhntr@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just wondering, which LSI card ?
> > Was this 32 drives in Raid 1+0 with a two drive raid 1 for logs or
> some
> > other config?
> 
> We were using teh LSI8888 but I'll be switching back to Areca when we
> go back to HW RAID.  The LSI8888 only performed well if we setup 15
> RAID-1 pairs in HW and use linux SW RAID 0 on top.  RAID1+0 in the
> LSI8888 was a pretty mediocre performer.  Areca 1680 OTOH, beats it in
> every test, with HW RAID10 only.  Much simpler to admin.

Interesting, thanks for sharing. 

I guess I have never gotten to the point where I felt I needed more than 2
drives for my xlogs. Maybe I have been dismissing that as a possibility
something. (my biggest array is only 24 SFF drives tho)

I am trying to get my hands on a dual core lsi card for testing at work.
(either a 9265-8i or 9285-8e) don't see any dual core 6Gbps SAS Areca cards
yet....still rocking a Arcea 1130 at home tho. 


-M