From: Matthew Schumacher <matt.s@aptalaska.net>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: SAN/NAS options
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 15:41:09 -0900
Message-ID: <43A75325.7070006@aptalaska.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051216221909.GU53809@pervasive.com>
References: <Pine.OSX.4.61.0512140155590.282@office-dhcp-18.bway.net>
<20051216221909.GU53809@pervasive.com>
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:56:10AM -0500, Charles Sprickman wrote:
> You'll note that I'm being somewhat driven by my OS of choice, FreeBSD.
>
>>Unlike Solaris or other commercial offerings, there is no nice volume
>>management available. While I'd love to keep managing a dozen or so
>>FreeBSD boxes, I could be persuaded to go to Solaris x86 if the volume
>>management really shines and Postgres performs well on it.
>
>
> Have you looked at vinum? It might not qualify as a true volume manager,
> but it's still pretty handy.
I am looking very closely at purchasing a SANRAD Vswitch 2000, a Nexsan
SATABoy with SATA disks, and the Qlogic iscsi controller cards.
Nexsan claims up to 370MB/s sustained per controller and 44,500 IOPS but
I'm not sure if that is good or bad. It's certainly faster than the LSI
megaraid controller I'm using now with a raid 1 mirror.
The sanrad box looks like it saves money in that you don't have to by
controller cards for everything, but for I/O intensive servers such as
the database server, I would end up buying an iscsi controller card anyway.
At this point I'm not sure what the best solution is. I like the idea
of having logical disks available though iscsi because of how flexible
it is, but I really don't want to spend $20k (10 for the nexsan and 10
for the sanrad) and end up with poor performance.
On other advantage to iscsi is that I can go completely diskless on my
servers and boot from iscsi which means that I don't have to have spare
disks for each host, now I just have spare disks for the nexsan chassis.
So the question becomes: has anyone put postgres on an iscsi san, and if
so how did it perform?
schu
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: matt.s@aptalaska.net
Subject: Re: SAN/NAS options
In-Reply-To: <43A75325.7070006@aptalaska.net>
* 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