On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:12:35 +0200
"Alexander Priem" <ap@cict.nl> wrote:
> I am asking this because a NAS device is much cheaper to set up than a
> couple of SCSI disks. I would like to use a relatively cheap NAS
> device which uses four IDE drives (7.200 rpm), like the Dell
> PowerVault 725N. The disks themselves would be much slower than SCSI
> disks, I know, but a NAS device can be equipped with 3 Gb of memory,
> so this would make a very large disk cache, right? If this NAS would
> be dedicated only to PostgreSQL, would this be slower/faster than a
> SCSI RAID-10 setup of 6 disks? It would be much cheaper...
>
The big concern would be the network connection, unless you are going
fiber. You need to use _AT LEAST_ gigabit. _at least_. If you do
go that route it'd be interesting to see bonnie results. And the
other thing - remember that just because you are running NAS doesn't
mean you can attach another machine running postgres and have a
cluster. (See archives for more info about this).
I suppose it all boils down to your budget (I usually get to work with
a budget of $0). And I mentioned this in another post- If you don't mind
refurb disks(or slightly used) check out ebay - you can get scsi disks
by the truckload for cheap.
--
Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
http://www.jefftrout.com/
http://www.stuarthamm.net/
