On 12/1/09 6:49 PM, "Greg Smith" <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Scott Carey wrote:
>> 3ware 95xx and 96xx had performance somewhere between PERC 5 (horrid) and
>> PERC 6 (mediocre) when I tested them with large SATA drives with RAID 10.
>> Haven't tried raid 6 or 5. Haven't tried the "SA" model that supports SAS
> The only models I've tested and recommended lately are exactly those
> though. The 9690SA is the earliest 3ware card I've mentioned as seeming
> to have reasonable performance. The 95XX cards are certainly much
> slower than similar models from, say, Areca. I've never had one of the
> earlier 96XX models to test. Now you've got me wondering what the
> difference between the earlier and current 96XX models really is.
9650 was made by 3Ware, essentially a PCIe version of the 9550. The 9690SA
was from some sort of acquisition/merger. They are not the same product line
at all.
3Ware, IIRC, has its roots in ATA and SATA RAID.
I gave up on them after the 9650 and 9550 experiences (on Linux) though.
>
> --
> Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD
> PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
> g...@2ndquadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com
>
>
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
