In the last episode (Nov 03), Francisco Reyes said:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> How about for database? In particular postgresql.
> How bad would RAID 5 be for it?
>
> I still have some, limited, hopes I can convince the owner of the
> company to go with RAID 10 with 10K rpm drives.. the most likelyhood
> we will go with RAID 5, 7200rpm drives for a database project ahead.
> Alternatively I will see how RAID 5 with 10K rpm SCSI drives compares
> price wise, but I am sure it will be substantially more. :-(
The biggest reason for going RAID-5 is that you only get 50% useable
capacity out of RAID 10, and at least 75% out of a RAID 5 (with a 3+1
layout. With an 8+1 layout you get 88%). If you don't need fast
writes, or your controller has sufficient cache to mask the write
penalty, RAID 5 sure holds a lot more data on the same disks.
Always keep your logs on a separate mirrored set of disks, of course.
--
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
