Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C08AA2E0037 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 19:39:10 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30828-02 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 19:39:07 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: delayed 00:05:04.036008 by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from ipmail04.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail04.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.57]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6149D2E2F40 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 19:39:07 -0300 (ADT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjQBAK6a2kc7p6Pw/2dsb2JhbAAIqgA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,503,1199626200"; d="scan'208";a="73958017" Received: from ppp59-167-163-240.lns1.mel4.internode.on.net (HELO [192.168.1.21]) ([59.167.163.240]) by ipmail04.adl2.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 15 Mar 2008 09:03:59 +1030 Message-ID: <47DAFD60.1090602@eclinic.com.au> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 09:34:08 +1100 From: Leigh Dyer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Glyn Astill , "Pgsql-Performance ((E-mail))" Subject: Re: Adaptec 5805 SAS Raid References: <314693.74746.qm@web25801.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <314693.74746.qm@web25801.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200803/320 X-Sequence-Number: 29274 Glyn Astill wrote: > Any of you chaps used this controller? > It looks very similar to the rebadged Adaptec that Sun shipped in the X4150 I ordered a few weeks ago, though the Sun model had only 256MB of cache RAM. I was wary of going Adaptec after my experiences with the PERC/3i, which couldn't even seem to manage a single disk's worth of read performance from a RAID-1 array, but I was pleasantly surprised by this card. I'm only running a RAID-1 array on it, with 2 146GB 10krpm SAS drives, but I was impressed with the read performance -- it seems quite happy to split sequential reads across the two disks. Here are the bonnie++ numbers I took during my run-in testing: Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random- -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP membrane 12G 54417 89 86808 15 41489 6 59517 96 125266 10 629.6 0 ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create-------- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- files:max:min /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP membrane 16 19496 97 +++++ +++ 14220 68 7673 40 +++++ +++ 5246 26 I'm not sure if I'd yet be comfortable running a larger array for a database on an Adaptec card, but it's definitely a great improvement on the earlier Adaptec hardware I've used. Thanks Leigh > > > ___________________________________________________________ > Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! For Good > > http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ > >