From: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
To: Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org>
Cc: Pgsql performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: 3ware vs Areca
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:19:50 -0600
Message-ID: <dcc563d10807110719qfd41e2ej6bd6b89654f4c995@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <581D2333-E731-4843-BC31-39840E272C62@torgo.978.org>
References: <581D2333-E731-4843-BC31-39840E272C62@torgo.978.org>
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 7:26 AM, Jeff <threshar@torgo.978.org> wrote:
> I've got a couple boxes with some 3ware 9550 controllers, and I'm less than
> pleased with performance on them.. Sequential access is nice, but start
> seeking around and you kick it in the gut. (I've found posts on the
> internets about others having similar issues). My last box with a 3ware I
> simply had it in jbod mode and used sw raid and it smoked the hw.
> Anyway, anybody have experience in 3ware vs Areca - I've heard plenty of
> good anecdotal things that Areca is much better, just wondering if anybody
> here has firsthand experience. It'll be plugged into about 8 10k rpm sata
> disks.
What RAID level are you using? How much cache do you have? Write
back / battery backed? What OS and version?
Everything I've heard sys they're both fast performers.
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: scott.marlowe@gmail.com, threshar@torgo.978.org
Subject: Re: 3ware vs Areca
In-Reply-To: <dcc563d10807110719qfd41e2ej6bd6b89654f4c995@mail.gmail.com>
* 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