Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 901B99F9B48 for ; Sat, 8 Sep 2007 14:25:40 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 51431-02 for ; Sat, 8 Sep 2007 14:25:37 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from cronos.madness.at (madness.at [217.196.146.217]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6495D9F9B45 for ; Sat, 8 Sep 2007 14:25:37 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mastermind.kaltenbrunner.cc ([83.215.233.60]) by cronos.madness.at with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IU43g-0007en-RL; Sat, 08 Sep 2007 19:25:28 +0200 Message-ID: <46E2DB04.1080803@kaltenbrunner.cc> Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 19:25:24 +0200 From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070607) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Joshua D. Drake" CC: Gregory Stark , Simon Riggs , Bernd Helmle , mfatticcioni@mbigroup.it, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: DRBD and Postgres: how to improve the perfomance? References: <2C070D1C3970467FF64F6B6A@imhotep.credativ.de> <1189232904.4281.19.camel@ebony.site> <87k5r1zd52.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> <46E2CAAF.50205@commandprompt.com> <46E2CEF3.1030908@kaltenbrunner.cc> <46E2D38A.6070607@commandprompt.com> In-Reply-To: <46E2D38A.6070607@commandprompt.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200709/150 X-Sequence-Number: 26695 Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: >> Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>> Gregory Stark wrote: >>>> "Simon Riggs" writes: >>>>> You're right, but the distinction is a small one. What are the chances >>>>> of losing two independent servers within a few milliseconds of each >>>>> other? >>>> If they're on the same power bus? >>> That chance is minuscule or at least should be. Of course we are >>> assuming some level of conditioned power that is independent of the >>> power bus, e.g; a UPS. >> how is that making it different in practise ? - if both are on the same >> UPS they are affectively on the same power bus ... > > Well I was thinking the bus that is in the wall. I would assume that > people were smart enough to have independent UPS systems for each server. > > city power->line conditioning generator->panel->plug->UPS->server > > wash, rinse repeat. the typical datacenter version of this is actually more like: city power->UPS (with generator in parallel)->panel->plug or city power->flywheel->(maybe UPS)->panel->plug it is not really that common to have say two different UPS feeds in your rack (at least not for normal housing or the average corporate datacenter) - mostly you get two feeds from different power distribution panels (so different breakers) but that's about it. Having a local UPS attached is usually not really that helpful either because those have limited capacity need space and are an additional thing that can (and will) fail. Stefan