pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Yu <wyu@talisys.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 06:37:48 -0800
Message-ID: <dlfg7t$1r3u$1@news.hub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41AD9695-69AC-4677-AEBD-9D9E21BD8DCF@advfn.com>
References: <3E37B936B592014B978C4415F90D662D01995F7B@MI8NYCMAIL06.Mi8.com>
	<B41A9E46-AC4F-4A3A-B383-AB70091745CF@fastcrypt.com>
	<33c6269f0511152116s4483af82s91c711b1b902da14@mail.gmail.com>
	<dlfa10$2b2n$1@news.hub.org>
	<41AD9695-69AC-4677-AEBD-9D9E21BD8DCF@advfn.com>

Alex Stapleton wrote:
> Your going to have to factor in the increased failure rate in your  cost 
> measurements, including any downtime or performance degradation  whilst 
> rebuilding parts of your RAID array. It depends on how long  your 
> planning for this system to be operational as well of course.

If we go 32xRAID10, rebuild time should be the same as rebuild time in a 
4xRAID10 system. Only the hard drive that was replaced needs rebuild -- 
not the entire array.

And yes, definitely need a bunch of drives lying around as spares.



view thread (173+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <dlfg7t$1r3u$1@news.hub.org>
Permalink:  ../dlfg7t$1r3u$1@news.hub.org/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/dlfg7t$1r3u$1@news.hub.org

 · 

reply
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: wyu@talisys.com
  Subject: Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
  In-Reply-To: <dlfg7t$1r3u$1@news.hub.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