From: Douglas McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
Cc: Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org>
Cc: Pgsql-Performance ((E-mail)) <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Cc: PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 08:15:22 -0400
Message-ID: <87vesenkit.fsf@suzuka.mcnaught.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8764kexzin.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
References: <e3pmkc$12mk$1@news.hub.org>
<473FC220-A52C-4954-81E9-A14ED33164C2@blighty.com>
<4460BA8B.7010600@commandprompt.com>
<5AF87D32-F602-4973-AA21-84E0CFEA1774@khera.org>
<87mzdroyzb.fsf@suzuka.mcnaught.org>
<8764kexzin.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes:
> Douglas McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org> writes:
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never heard of a 15kRPM SATA drive.
>
> Well, dollar for dollar you would get the best performance from slower drives
> anyways since it would give you more spindles. 15kRPM drives are *expensive*.
Depends on your power, heat and rack space budget too... If you need
max performance out of a given rack space (rather than max density),
SCSI is still the way to go. I'll definitely agree that SATA is
becoming much more of a player in the server storage market, though.
-Doug
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: doug@mcnaught.org, gsstark@mit.edu, vivek@khera.org, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid
In-Reply-To: <87vesenkit.fsf@suzuka.mcnaught.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox