X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7150D9FA6B3 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:24:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10361-10 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:24:38 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from vms040pub.verizon.net (vms040pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.40]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3EE89FA634 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:24:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([72.66.113.225]) by vms040.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-4.02 (built Sep 9 2005)) with ESMTPA id <0J1300DDIRL1C4L8@vms040.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:24:37 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id D35D66E5EF for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 06:24:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (osgiliath.home.mathom.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id mFSNVmv1HPm1 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 06:24:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E02EB6E925; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 06:24:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 06:24:32 -0400 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: SAN performance mystery In-reply-to: <449677EB.50609@proximity.com.au> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-followup-to: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20060619102430.GD3303@mathom.us> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mathom.us X-Pgp-Fingerprint: 53 FF 38 00 E7 DD 0A 9C 84 52 84 C5 EE DF 7C 88 References: <4491D61B.9040507@proximity.com.au> <1150408614.26538.95.camel@state.g2switchworks.com> <449677EB.50609@proximity.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200606/374 X-Sequence-Number: 19731 On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 08:09:47PM +1000, Tim Allen wrote: >Certainly, the read performance of the SATA disk still beats the SAN, >and there is no way to lie about read performance. Sure there is: you have the data cached in system RAM. I find it real hard to believe that you can sustain 161MB/s off a single SATA disk. Mike Stone