Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL?
| От | Steve Poe |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4247F48F.8090308@sfnet.cc обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: which dual-CPU hardware/OS is fastest for PostgreSQL? (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>) |
| Список | pgsql-performance |
Greg Stark wrote: >"Merlin Moncure" <merlin.moncure@rcsonline.com> writes: > > > >>Alex wrote: >> >> >>>Without starting too much controvesy I hope, I would seriously >>>recommend you evaluate the AMCC Escalade 9500S SATA controller. >>> >>> >. > > >>At the risk of shaming myself with another 'me too' post, I'd like to >>say that my experiences back this up 100%. The Escalade controllers are >>excellent and the Raptor drives are fast and reliable (so far). >> >> >. > >I assume AMCC == 3ware now? > >Has anyone verified that fsync is safe on these controllers? Ie, that they >aren't caching writes and "lying" about the write completing like IDE >drives oft > > For those who speak highly of the Escalade controllers and/Raptor SATA drives, how is the database being utilized, OLTP or primarily read access? This is good information I am learning, but I also see the need to understand the context of how the hardware is being used. Steve Poe
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: