Re: SCSI vs. IDE performance test
От | Ron Johnson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SCSI vs. IDE performance test |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1066985488.12531.511.camel@haggis обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SCSI vs. IDE performance test ("Stephen" <jleelim@xxxxxx.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 11:01, Stephen wrote: > The SCSI improvement over IDE seems overrated in the test. I would have > expected at most a 30% improvement. Other reviews seem to point out that IDE > performs just as well or better. > > See Tom's hardware: > http://www20.tomshardware.com/storage/20020305/index.html When TCQ becomes a reality in IDE drives, they'll have a fighting chance, but the slower seek times and rotational speeds will still do them in. Also, does an 8MB cache *really* make that much of a difference? After all, it can only cache 0.0067% of a 120GB drive, and 0.00267% of the new 300GB disks. Speaking of which, that 300GB HDD sounds like a dream for near- line storage, and even for nightly backups, if it is ever put in SBB-type packaging. http://www20.tomshardware.com/storage/20031008/index.html Imagine a scheme where you rapidly pg_dump to the 300GB drive, then, at leisure, tar the dump file to tape. Stripe a few together, and keep a month of backups on-line for quick recovery, along with the tape archives, in case the stripeset gets wasted, too. > "Ron Johnson" <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote in message > news:1066837102.12532.176.camel@haggis... > > > http://hardware.devchannel.org/hardwarechannel/03/10/20/1953249.shtml?tid=20 > &tid=38&tid=49 -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net Jefferson, LA USA "Adventure is a sign of incompetence" Stephanson, great polar explorer
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: