User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.1.051004
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:21:00 -0800
Subject: Re: SAN/NAS options
From: "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan@greenplum.com>
To: "Charles Sprickman" <spork@bway.net>
cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Message-ID: <BFEFC47C.1A79F%llonergan@greenplum.com>
Thread-Topic: [PERFORM] SAN/NAS options
Thread-Index: AcYZgwZqNPbr7Y0KRf29uIqWcR1mmgAdQdV3
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSX.4.61.0601142216190.312@gee5.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Charles,

On 1/14/06 7:23 PM, "Charles Sprickman" <spork@bway.net> wrote:

> The drives and the controller go in the Chenbro case.  U320 SCSI from the
> RAID controller in the Chenbro case to the 1U server.

Thanks for the explanation - I didn't click on your Areca link until now,
thinking it was a generic link to their products page.

Looks great - I think this might do better than the SATA -> FC products
because of the use of faster processors, but I'd keep my expectations low
until we see some performance data on it.

We've had some very poor experiences with Fibre Channel attach SATA disk
controllers.  A large vendor of same ultimately concluded that they will no
longer recommend them for database use because of the terrible performance
of their unit.  We ended up with a 110MB/s bottleneck on the controller when
using 200MB/s FC connections.

With the dual U320 attach and 16 drives, you should be able to saturate the
SCSI busses at about 600MB/s.  It would be great if you could post your I/O
results here!

- Luke