Re: SCSI vs SATA - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Michael Stone
Subject Re: SCSI vs SATA
Date
Msg-id 20070406114336.GD4374@mathom.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SCSI vs SATA  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: SCSI vs SATA
List pgsql-performance
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 02:00:15AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>It seems hard to believe that the vendors themselves wouldn't burn in
>the drives for half a day, if that's all it takes to eliminate a large
>fraction of infant mortality.  The savings in return processing and
>customer goodwill would surely justify the electricity they'd use.

Wouldn't help if the reason for the infant mortality is bad handling
between the factory and the rack. One thing that I did question in the
CMU study was the lack of infant mortality--I've definately observed it,
but it might just be that my UPS guy is clumsier than theirs.

Mike Stone

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Michael Stone
Date:
Subject: Re: SCSI vs SATA
Next
From: Ron
Date:
Subject: Re: SCSI vs SATA