Received: from localhost (maia-1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A7CC9FA1D7 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:43:54 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 69967-01 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:43:51 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no (cassarossa.samfundet.no [129.241.93.19]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C6EA9FA5A2 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:43:50 -0300 (ADT) Received: from trofast.ipv6.sesse.net ([2001:700:300:1803:20e:cff:fe36:a766] helo=trofast.sesse.net) by cassarossa.samfundet.no with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.50) id 1ILiRn-0007zs-LY; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:43:47 +0200 Received: from root by trofast.sesse.net with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1ILiRn-0008NZ-38; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:43:47 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:43:47 +0200 From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" To: Michael Ben-Nes Cc: PostgreSQL Performance Subject: Re: Integrated perc 5/i Message-ID: <20070816164347.GB32094@uio.no> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Ben-Nes , PostgreSQL Performance References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.20.4 on a x86_64 X-Message-Flag: Outlook? --> http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200708/160 X-Sequence-Number: 26290 On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 11:26:52AM +0300, Michael Ben-Nes wrote: > Does any one have any experience with RAID 10 & perc 5/i ? Without having done PostgreSQL benchmarking, we have a 2950 with four SATA disks in RAID 10 (and two SAS disks in RAID 1), and have not seen any performance issues. /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/