Douglas McNaught wrote:
Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On May 9, 2006, at 11:51 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
And dollar for dollar, SCSI will NOT be faster nor have the hard
drive capacity that you will get with SATA.
Does this hold true still under heavy concurrent-write loads? I'm
preparing yet another big DB server and if SATA is a better option,
I'm all (elephant) ears.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never heard of a 15kRPM SATA drive.
Best I have seen is 10k but if I can put 4x the number of drives in the
array at the same cost... I don't need 15k.
Joshua D. Drake
-Doug
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
