Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB3032E0090 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:52:47 -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 56644-10 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:52:45 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from www.postnewspapers.com.au (www.postnewspapers.com.au [202.61.230.242]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D47062E004E for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:52:44 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postnewspapers.com.au (202-89-185-120.static.dsl.amnet.net.au [202.89.185.120]) by www.postnewspapers.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68564C3FB; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:52:40 +0900 (WST) Received: from localhost (access [127.0.0.1]) by mail.postnewspapers.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C191E0435; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:52:40 +0900 (WST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at postnewspapers.com.au Received: from mail.postnewspapers.com.au ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (access.postnewspapers.com.au [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id oNkHinWCfRtA; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:52:38 +0900 (WST) Received: from [203.161.97.213] (203.161.97.213.static.amnet.net.au [203.161.97.213]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Craig Ringer", Issuer "POST Certificate Authority" (verified OK)) by mail.postnewspapers.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D2611E0434; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:52:38 +0900 (WST) Message-ID: <47E047B0.3090100@postnewspapers.com.au> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:52:32 +0900 From: Craig Ringer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: david@lang.hm Cc: Gregory Stark , Andrej Ricnik-Bay , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: What is the best way to storage music files in Postgresql References: <8fb205ea0803152311n2c950758g253f4cefd20cff7d@mail.gmail.com> <47DCBD63.9050109@postnewspapers.com.au> <4544e0330803171101g680ffa5bj8ac32908a9f3dfb5@mail.gmail.com> <8fb205ea0803171139h63b55fdrf62776851583a74d@mail.gmail.com> <4544e0330803172026h3eae59a1u8914bda1a5a95bb5@mail.gmail.com> <47DF9278.70605@postnewspapers.com.au> <87bq5blsr6.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200803/385 X-Sequence-Number: 29339 david@lang.hm wrote: > you can? I've never seen a raid 5 setup with more then a single parity > dirve (or even the option of having more then one drives worth of > redundancy). you can have hot-spare drives, but thats a different thing. > With RAID 4, where the "parity drives" are in fact dedicated to parity information, the controller could just store the parity data mirrored on more than one drive. Unfortunately write performance on RAID 4 is absolutely horrible, and a second or third parity disk would not help with that. I suppose there's nothing stopping a controller adding a second disk's worth of duplicate parity information when striping a four or more disk RAID 5 array, but I thought that's basically what RAID 6 was. -- Craig Ringer