X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B23829FA43C for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:25:59 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 03069-05 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:25:51 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from buniche.hst.terra.com.br (buniche.hst.terra.com.br [200.176.10.197]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E56E9FA0E5 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:25:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from caliope.hst.terra.com.br (caliope.hst.terra.com.br [200.176.10.8]) by buniche.hst.terra.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 620933DD806D for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:25:49 -0300 (BRT) X-Terra-Karma: -2% X-Terra-Hash: 8aca679a3c73cf18c4a9f366fd738244 Received-SPF: pass (caliope.hst.terra.com.br: domain of terra.com.br designates 200.176.10.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=200.176.10.8; envelope-from=carlosreimer@terra.com.br; helo=reimer; Received: from reimer (unknown [200.180.59.84]) (authenticated user carlosreimer@terra.com.br) by caliope.hst.terra.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id F35C41BD4146 for ; Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:25:48 -0300 (BRT) Reply-To: From: To: Subject: Initial database loading and IDE x SCSI Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:25:57 -0300 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: Normal X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200606/8 X-Sequence-Number: 19365 Hi, I would like to know if my supposition is right. Considering an environment with only one hard disk attached to a server, an initial loading of the database probably is much faster using an IDE/ATA interface with write-back on than using an SCSI interface. Thatīs because of the SCSI command interface overhead. Then main advantage of SCSI interfaces, the multiuser environment is lost in this scenery. Am I right? Am I missing something here? Even if Iīm right, is something that could be done too improove SCSI loading performance in this scenery? Thanks in advance! Reimer