On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:12:35 +0200 "Alexander Priem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.jefftrout.com/ http://www.stuarthamm.net/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]