From: George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Why HDD performance is better than SSD in this case
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 12:44:10 -0400
Message-ID: <9c3a9ae4-25c7-c6e4-7405-a443a2a77aa9@comcast.net> (raw)
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 09:46:32 +0200, Fabio Pardi <f.pardi@portavita.eu>
wrote:
> RAID 0 to store production data should never be used. Never a good
> idea, in my opinion.
RAID 0 by itself should never be used. Combined with other RAID
levels, it can boost performance without sacrificing reliability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nested_RAID_levels
Personally, I don't like RAID 0 + ? schemes because they use too many
disks (with associated reliability issues). The required performance
usually can be achieved in other ways. But YMMV.
George
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: gneuner2@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Why HDD performance is better than SSD in this case
In-Reply-To: <9c3a9ae4-25c7-c6e4-7405-a443a2a77aa9@comcast.net>
* 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