From: David Boreham <david_list@boreham.org>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 07:51:31 -0700
Message-ID: <437B4773.1040404@boreham.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <437B3B18.1040509@commandprompt.com>
References: <3E37B936B592014B978C4415F90D662D01995F7B@MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com>
<33c6269f0511152115v1a34ab81j30f1f5df5a6c6956@mail.gmail.com>
<437B3B18.1040509@commandprompt.com>
>Spend a fortune on dual core CPUs and then buy crappy disks... I bet
>for most applications this system will be IO bound, and you will see a
>nice lot of drive failures in the first year of operation with
>consumer grade drives.
I guess I've never bought into the vendor story that there are
two reliability grades. Why would they bother making two
different kinds of bearing, motor etc ? Seems like it's more
likely an excuse to justify higher prices. In my experience the
expensive SCSI drives I own break frequently while the cheapo
desktop drives just keep chunking along (modulo certain products
that have a specific known reliability problem).
I'd expect that a larger number of hotter drives will give a less reliable
system than a smaller number of cooler ones.
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: david_list@boreham.org
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
In-Reply-To: <437B4773.1040404@boreham.org>
* 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