Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Pierre C
Subject Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows
Date
Msg-id op.vnwwyom4eorkce@apollo13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows  (Gael Le Mignot <gael@pilotsystems.net>)
List pgsql-performance
>  > The real performance problem with RAID 5 won't show up until a drive
>  > dies and it starts rebuilding
>
> I don't  agree with that. RAID5 is  very slow for random  writes, since
> it needs to :

"The real problem" is when RAID5 loses a drive and goes from "acceptable"
kind of slow, to "someone's fired" kind of slow. Then of course in the
middle the rebuild, a bad sector is discovered in some place the
filesystem has never visited yet on one of the remaining drives, and all
hell breaks loose.

RAID6 is only one extra disk...

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows