Re: SAN vs Internal Disks - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Joel Fradkin
Subject Re: SAN vs Internal Disks
Date
Msg-id 007701c7f0ba$17e40030$837ba8c0@jfradkin64
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SAN vs Internal Disks  ("Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: SAN vs Internal Disks
List pgsql-performance
I am not sure I agree with that evaluation.
I only have 2 dell database servers and they have been 100% reliable.
Maybe he is referring to support which does tend be up to who you get.
When I asked about performance on my new server they were very helpful but I
did have a bad time on my NAS device (but had the really cheap support plan
on it). They did help me get it fixed but I had to RMA all the drives on the
NAS as they were all bad and it was no fun installing the os as it had no
floppy. I got the better support for both the data base servers which are
using jbod from dell for the disk array. The quad proc opteron with duel
cores and 16gig of memory has been extremely fast (like 70%) over my older 4
proc 32 bit single core machine with 8 gig. But both are running postgres
and perform needed functionality. I would like to have redundant backups of
these as they are mission critical, but all in good time.

I'd recommend against Dell unless you're at a company that orders
computers by the hundred lot.  My experience with Dell has been that
unless you are a big customer you're just another number (a small one
at that) on a spreadsheet.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Joe Uhl
Date:
Subject: Re: SAN vs Internal Disks
Next
From: Arjen van der Meijden
Date:
Subject: Re: SAN vs Internal Disks