X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED0F253F8A for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:01:44 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 15869-03 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:01:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.195]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5648F53C80 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:01:32 -0300 (ADT) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so532385wri for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:01:32 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=gNz0HRmh78NeDHnKll/91H9Y/bopy+r2rd4zw38/jtMXWJni7Iv05UitgNESwTKFZxgLZVA5iI4hJnxyDzf85whd5UjcDriRsEx70+/3GuRXeJr897ial3LoyeFYziJNPsL4ibGpSSyhSmxUqAM7Jnkg+AUWMgZN3jkghX8Aods= Received: by 10.54.79.17 with SMTP id c17mr100007wrb; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.86.16 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <33c6269f05041410011fe1f283@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 13:01:30 -0400 From: Alex Turner Reply-To: Alex Turner To: "Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com" Subject: Re: Intel SRCS16 SATA raid? Cc: Greg Stark , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <87zmw1h0i2.fsf@stark.xeocode.com> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.499 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, RCVD_BY_IP, TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200504/300 X-Sequence-Number: 11697 I have read a large chunk of this, and I would highly recommend it to anyone who has been participating in the drive discussions. It is most informative!! Alex Turner netEconomist On 4/14/05, Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com w= rote: > Greg, >=20 > I posted this link under a different thread (the $7k server thread). It = is > a very good read on why SCSI is better for servers than ATA. I didn't no= te > bias, though it is from a drive manufacturer. YMMV. There is an > interesting, though dated appendix on different manufacturers' drive > characteristics. >=20 > http://www.seagate.com/content/docs/pdf/whitepaper/D2c_More_than_Interfac= e_ATA_vs_SCSI_042003.pdf >=20 > Enjoy, >=20 > Rick >=20 > pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 04/14/2005 09:54:45 AM: >=20 > > > > Our vendor is trying to sell us on an Intel SRCS16 SATA raid controller > > instead of the 3ware one. > > > > Poking around it seems this does come with Linux drivers and there is a > > battery backup option. So it doesn't seem to be completely insane. > > > > Anyone have any experience with these controllers? > > > > I'm also wondering about whether I'm better off with one of these SATA > raid > > controllers or just going with SCSI drives. > > > > -- > > greg > > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------= - > > TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend >=20 > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if you= r > joining column's datatypes do not match >