Message-ID: <4EA6CF16.5090001@boreham.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:00:38 -0600
From: David Boreham <david_list@boreham.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Choosing between Intel 320, Intel 510 or OCZ Vertex
	3 SSD for db server
References: 
 <CAPTAQB+VTVuk_fuDh2JLa9oDqwRONEMNfj1jBJiLw9rpmkAO2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EA5980E.9050903@boreham.org>
	<CAHyXU0zZxnznLuP+fytLHT6Wu257w7ysAyuALR0BVZ4JxYWROg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGTBQpYLLDC=fiE=sWhZk7wTdxsmKBaFV4+voMD_RnpokvY8PQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EA620D1.5090008@boreham.org>
	<CAGTBQpbqKtn49KzV0GKOvJ63bjv9s+fg1J6Mfs1AyFZncunrEg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGTBQpbqKtn49KzV0GKOvJ63bjv9s+fg1J6Mfs1AyFZncunrEg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 10/25/2011 8:55 AM, Claudio Freire wrote:
> But what about unexpected failures. Faulty electronics, stuff like 
> that? I really don't think a production server can work without at 
> least raid-1. 

Same approach : a server either works or it does not. The transition 
between working and not working may be expected or not expected. The 
solution is the same : use another machine to perform the work the now 
not working machine was doing. The big benefit of this approach is that 
you now do not need to worry about specific kinds of failure or 
individual components, including storage.

If it helps, think of this architecture as raid-1, but with the whole 
machine being the "drive" rather than individual storage devices.