Fwd: Multiple disks: RAID 5 or PG Cluster

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Yves Vindevogel
Тема Fwd: Multiple disks: RAID 5 or PG Cluster
Дата
Msg-id 30dcefefa83f93cb069019fd41427a03@implements.be
обсуждение исходный текст
Список pgsql-performance
Ok, I will hate that day, but it's only 6 months


Begin forwarded message:


<excerpt><bold><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>From:
</color></bold>Vivek Khera <<vivek@khera.org>

<bold><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>Date: </color></bold>Fri 17
Jun 2005 23:26:43 CEST

<bold><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>To: </color></bold>Yves
Vindevogel <<yves.vindevogel@implements.be>

<bold><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>Subject: </color>Re:
[PERFORM] Multiple disks: RAID 5 or PG Cluster

</bold>


On Jun 17, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Yves Vindevogel wrote:


<excerpt><fontfamily><param>Georgia</param><bigger>That means that
only 2 / 5 of my discs are actual storage. That's a bit low, imho.</bigger></fontfamily>


<fontfamily><param>Georgia</param><bigger>Maybe I can ask my question
again:</bigger></fontfamily>

<fontfamily><param>Georgia</param><bigger>Would I go for RAID 5, RAID
0 or PG clustering</bigger></fontfamily>


<fontfamily><param>Georgia</param><bigger>On 17 Jun 2005, at 22:21,
Vivek Khera wrote:</bigger></fontfamily>

</excerpt><color><param>0000,0000,DDDD</param>If you're allergic to
RAID10, then do RAID5.  but you'll sacrifice performance.  You'll hate
life the day you blow a disk and have to rebuild everything, even if
it is all easily restored.</color>





</excerpt>Met vriendelijke groeten,

Bien à vous,

Kind regards,


<bold>Yves Vindevogel</bold>

<bold>Implements</bold>

<smaller>

</smaller>Ok, I will hate that day, but it's only 6 months

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org>
> Date: Fri 17 Jun 2005 23:26:43 CEST
> To: Yves Vindevogel <yves.vindevogel@implements.be>
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Multiple disks: RAID 5 or PG Cluster
>
>
> On Jun 17, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Yves Vindevogel wrote:
>
>> That means that only 2 / 5 of my discs are actual storage. That's a
>> bit low, imho.
>>
>> Maybe I can ask my question again:
>> Would I go for RAID 5, RAID 0 or PG clustering
>>
>> On 17 Jun 2005, at 22:21, Vivek Khera wrote:
> If you're allergic to RAID10, then do RAID5.  but you'll sacrifice
> performance.  You'll hate life the day you blow a disk and have to
> rebuild everything, even if it is all easily restored.
>
>
>
>
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Bien à vous,
Kind regards,

Yves Vindevogel
Implements

<smaller>


Mail: yves.vindevogel@implements.be  - Mobile: +32 (478) 80 82 91


Kempische Steenweg 206 - 3500 Hasselt - Tel-Fax: +32 (11) 43 55 76


Web: http://www.implements.be

<italic><x-tad-smaller>

First they ignore you.  Then they laugh at you.  Then they fight you.
Then you win.

Mahatma Ghandi.</x-tad-smaller></italic></smaller>



Mail: yves.vindevogel@implements.be  - Mobile: +32 (478) 80 82 91

Kempische Steenweg 206 - 3500 Hasselt - Tel-Fax: +32 (11) 43 55 76

Web: http://www.implements.be

First they ignore you.  Then they laugh at you.  Then they fight you.
Then you win.
Mahatma Ghandi.

Вложения

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: mudfoot@rawbw.com
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Multiple disks: RAID 5 or PG Cluster
Следующее
От: Yves Vindevogel
Дата:
Сообщение: Fwd: Multiple disks: RAID 5 or PG Cluster