Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E3991337B49 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 11:02:34 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 76072-04 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 15:02:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.17.9]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B2A133655C for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 11:02:26 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.1.6] (mail.highperformancepostgresql.com [71.179.240.8]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrbap0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MfBmc-1PV12j2mF8-00OroE; Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:02:24 +0100 Message-ID: <4D4AC37D.2070207@2ndquadrant.com> Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 10:02:21 -0500 From: Greg Smith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100317) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Birken CC: Scott Marlowe , pgsql-performance Subject: Re: Which RAID Controllers to pick/avoid? References: <4D4A411A.3040102@2ndquadrant.com> <4D4A4804.3040307@2ndquadrant.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:Wo72ZPEWImYiINodTT3QTTeKxyCkSwRhiHkxCvxHLdi QT5NTyHndcFnhWqTm0dkKJ+g5+58SlgQTBserOea2ZTEnGyM1X HrvtPTcrGFS62GEtbmJHmReNdlwzrCaMAZfi4sZlyflNsPbaz9 a86OCJO6VtoSPhK1CyusEZIsv+bH+tUoYrbw42nJ0HlGm35+pd EK5nIV3EN4l5KKhOPSteMr2wNczuBbC6F5ENQxGdAQ= X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201102/73 X-Sequence-Number: 42211 Dan Birken wrote: > - Is the supercap + flash memory considered superior to the BBU in > practice? Is that type of system well tested? The main risk is that it's a pretty new approach. The standard BBU setup has been used for a long time now; this whole flash+supercap thing has only showed up in the last couple of years. Theoretically it's better; the #1 weakness of the old battery setup was only surviving an outage of a few days, and storing to flash doesn't have that issue. It's just got the usual risks of something new. > - Is the linux support of the LSI and Adaptec cards comparable? Seems to be. The latest versions of Adaptec's arcconf utility even provide about the same quality of command-line tools as LSI's megactl, after being behind in that area for a while. Only quirk, and I can't say where this was the manufacturer of the box or not because they installed the base OS, is that the 5405 setup I saw didn't turn off the write caches on the individual drives of the system. That's the standard safe practice and default for the LSI cards. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us "PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books