Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 212509F96E0 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 18:16:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 42392-03 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 18:16:20 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from vms042pub.verizon.net (vms042pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.42]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 868719F9687 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 18:16:23 -0300 (ADT) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([71.163.137.253]) by vms042.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JO800C4A2R31IA0@vms042.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:09:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E1511F816 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:09:01 -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 g44itYyVtwJw for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:09:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 85A5E1F814; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:09:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:09:00 -0400 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: SAN vs Internal Disks In-reply-to: <20070911205550.GA38801@decibel.org> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-followup-to: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20070911210857.GQ1795@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: <20070907100446.GE1795@mathom.us> <20070907103341.GC20896@oppetid.no> <20070911205550.GA38801@decibel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200709/199 X-Sequence-Number: 26744 On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 03:55:51PM -0500, Decibel! wrote: >Also, to reply to someone else's email... there is one big reason to use >a SAN over direct storage: you can do HA that results in 0 data loss. >Good SANs are engineered to be highly redundant, with multiple >controllers, PSUs, etc, so that the odds of losing the SAN itself are >very, very low. The same isn't true with DAS. You can get DAS arrays with multiple controllers, PSUs, etc. DAS != single disk. Mike Stone