Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B317163389C for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:27:50 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65870-09 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:27:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:09:46.806751 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mxtip01-umsystem-out.um.umsystem.edu (mxtip01-umsystem-out.um.umsystem.edu [209.106.229.49]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0006633726 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:27:39 -0400 (AST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApsEAHS4+krRauUp/2dsb2JhbACEcsdighOGJ4hOgTCCOFQE Received: from unknown (HELO um-nsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu) ([209.106.229.41]) by mxtip01-mizzou-out.um.umsystem.edu with ESMTP; 11 Nov 2009 15:17:50 -0600 Received: from um-nsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu ([209.106.228.53]) by um-nsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:16:49 -0600 Received: from [128.206.129.74] ([128.206.129.74]) by um-nsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:16:49 -0600 Message-ID: <4AFB29C0.1060601@missouri.edu> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:16:48 -0600 From: Robert Schnabel User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Glyn Astill CC: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Adaptec Zero-Maintenance Cache Protection - Anyone using? References: <203123.14477.qm@web23602.mail.ird.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <203123.14477.qm@web23602.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Nov 2009 21:16:49.0840 (UTC) FILETIME=[4862A300:01CA6314] X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.599 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200911/118 X-Sequence-Number: 36286 Glyn Astill wrote: > Hi Chaps, > > I'm putting together some new servers, and whilst I've been happy with our current config of Adaptec 5805's with bbu I've noticed these 5805Z cards, apparently the contents of DRAM is copied into onboard flash upon power failure. > > Just wondered if anyone had any experience of this sort of technology yet? > > So far my head is telling me to just go with what I know... > > > Glyn I just put a 5445Z in my new server but considering I just got it turned on about 2 hours ago I really can't say much about it. I have several Adaptec cards with BBU and the Adaptec people talked me into trying the new Z version. It's a bit more expensive on the front end but supposedly you don't have to replace batteries. If you do go with the new Z version the first thing you'll have to figure out is where to put it. I was wondering what the zip ties were for when I opened the package then realized it's to secure the unit to wherever you want in the chassis. Kinda handy in a way but can also be a pain.