pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: SCSI vs SATA
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 07:38:17 -0400
Message-ID: <20070406113816.GC4374@mathom.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1HZeyl-0000cI-NU@elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <HCEPKPMCAJLDGJIBCLGHEENIHGAA.james@mansionfamily.plus.com>
	<1175807611.9839.120.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0704051905520.28411@asgard.lang.hm>
	<E1HZeyl-0000cI-NU@elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 11:19:04PM -0400, Ron wrote:
>Both statements are the literal truth.

Repeating something over and over again doesn't make it truth. The OP 
asked for statistical evidence (presumably real-world field evidence) to 
support that assertion. Thus far, all the publicly available evidence 
does not show a significant difference between SATA and SCSI reliability 
in the field.

Mike Stone

view thread (91+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20070406113816.GC4374@mathom.us>
Permalink:  ../20070406113816.GC4374@mathom.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20070406113816.GC4374@mathom.us

copy link · copy postgr.es

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
  Cc: mstone+postgres@mathom.us
  Subject: Re: SCSI vs SATA
  In-Reply-To: <20070406113816.GC4374@mathom.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox