pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin Arai <barai@cs.ucr.edu>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: What's the best hardver for PostgreSQL 8.1?
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 01:22:09 -0800
Message-ID: <43AFB641.6070009@cs.ucr.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3E37B936B592014B978C4415F90D662D01F1B59F@MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com>
References: <3E37B936B592014B978C4415F90D662D01F1B59F@MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com>

Have you done any benchmarking of the 9550SX against a software raid 
configuration? 

Luke Lonergan wrote:

>Frank, 
>
>  
>
>>  You definitely DO NOT want to do RAID 5 on a database server.  That
>>  is probably the worst setup you could have, I've seen it have lower
>>  performance than just a single hard disk. 
>>    
>>
>
>I've seen that on RAID0 and RAID10 as well.
>
>This is more about the quality and modernity of the RAID controller than
>anything else at this point, although there are some theoretical
>advantages of RAID10 from a random seek standpoint even if the adapter
>CPU is infinitely fast at checksumming.  We're using RAID5 in practice
>for OLAP / Data Warehousing systems very successfully using the newest
>RAID cards from 3Ware (9550SX).
>
>Note that host-based SCSI raid cards from LSI, Adaptec, Intel, Dell, HP
>and others have proven to have worse performance than a single disk
>drive in many cases, whether for RAID0 or RAID5.  In most circumstances
>I've seen, people don't even notice until they write a message to a
>mailing list about "my query runs slowly on xxx dbms".  In many cases,
>after they run a simple sequential transfer rate test using dd, they see
>that their RAID controller is the culprit.
>
>Recently, I helped a company named DeepData to improve their dbms
>performance, which was a combination of moving them to software RAID50
>on Linux and getting them onto Bizgres.  The disk subsystem sped up on
>the same hardware (minus the HW RAID card) by over a factor of 10.  The
>downside is that SW RAID is a pain in the neck for management - you have
>to shut down the Linux host when a disk fails to replace it.
>
>- Luke
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>  
>

-- 
*Benjamin Arai*
barai@cs.ucr.edu <emailto:barai@cs.ucr.edu>
http://www.benjaminarai.com

view thread (54+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <43AFB641.6070009@cs.ucr.edu>
Permalink:  ../43AFB641.6070009@cs.ucr.edu/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/43AFB641.6070009@cs.ucr.edu

 · 

reply

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: barai@cs.ucr.edu
  Subject: Re: What's the best hardver for PostgreSQL 8.1?
  In-Reply-To: <43AFB641.6070009@cs.ucr.edu>

* 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