Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Fagyal Csongor wrote: > Hi List, > > I am putting in a separate disk for our MySQL (4.1.7) server. I have > some MyISAM, some InnoDB tables. Lots of reads, lots of writes (mostly > atomic ones, insert/update one row), a few million rows per table, > approx. 100-400 queries per second. > > What would you say is better (with respect to performance): a small SCSI > disk (say 18G, 10kRPM) or a bigger SATA (say 120G, 7200RPM)? How about a 15kRPM SCSI disk? That's what I use and you can get them as large as 73GB. Andy -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI
Which SATA drive works under LINUX O/S? Kirti -Original Message- From: Larry Lowry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 4:06 PM To: Fagyal Csongor; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI For cost reasons I use SATA. Does the machine already have a SCSI card in it? If so I would use SCSI. If not I would give one of the newer 10k SATA drives a spin. Larry - Original Message - From: "Fagyal Csongor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 12:03 PM Subject: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI > Hi List, > > I am putting in a separate disk for our MySQL (4.1.7) server. I have > some MyISAM, some InnoDB tables. Lots of reads, lots of writes (mostly > atomic ones, insert/update one row), a few million rows per table, > approx. 100-400 queries per second. > > What would you say is better (with respect to performance): a small SCSI > disk (say 18G, 10kRPM) or a bigger SATA (say 120G, 7200RPM)? > > Thank you for your feeback, > - Csongor > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI
Sorry to hear that. Although I have been feeling that way lately about all WD drives. Seems like I have had to replace a lot of them lately. Even non SATA. Larry - Original Message - From: "Gary Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Larry Lowry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Fagyal Csongor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 1:47 PM Subject: Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI If you are talking about the WD Raptor's -- stay away. Out of 6 we used, 3 failed. Do a few googles and you'll hear the same from other users. On the other hand, the do fly. Raid10 them them on a 3ware 9500 and you'll be amazed. On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:06:10 -0800, Larry Lowry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For cost reasons I use SATA. Does the machine already have a SCSI card in it? If so I would use SCSI. If not I would give one of the newer 10k SATA drives a spin. Larry - Original Message - From: "Fagyal Csongor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 12:03 PM Subject: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI > Hi List, > > I am putting in a separate disk for our MySQL (4.1.7) server. I have > some MyISAM, some InnoDB tables. Lots of reads, lots of writes (mostly > atomic ones, insert/update one row), a few million rows per table, > approx. 100-400 queries per second. > > What would you say is better (with respect to performance): a small > SCSI > disk (say 18G, 10kRPM) or a bigger SATA (say 120G, 7200RPM)? > > Thank you for your feeback, > - Csongor > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: > http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI
Gary Richardson wrote: If you are talking about the WD Raptor's -- stay away. Out of 6 we used, 3 failed. Do a few googles and you'll hear the same from other users. On the other hand, the do fly. Raid10 them them on a 3ware 9500 and you'll be amazed. I agree on the 3Ware... Exceptionnal cards. Too bad for the Raptors :(. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI
If you are talking about the WD Raptor's -- stay away. Out of 6 we used, 3 failed. Do a few googles and you'll hear the same from other users. On the other hand, the do fly. Raid10 them them on a 3ware 9500 and you'll be amazed. On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:06:10 -0800, Larry Lowry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For cost reasons I use SATA. Does the machine already > have a SCSI card in it? If so I would use SCSI. If not > I would give one of the newer 10k SATA drives a spin. > > Larry > > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Fagyal Csongor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 12:03 PM > Subject: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI > > > Hi List, > > > > I am putting in a separate disk for our MySQL (4.1.7) server. I have > > some MyISAM, some InnoDB tables. Lots of reads, lots of writes (mostly > > atomic ones, insert/update one row), a few million rows per table, > > approx. 100-400 queries per second. > > > > What would you say is better (with respect to performance): a small SCSI > > disk (say 18G, 10kRPM) or a bigger SATA (say 120G, 7200RPM)? > > > > Thank you for your feeback, > > - Csongor > > > > -- > > MySQL General Mailing List > > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > > To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI
For cost reasons I use SATA. Does the machine already have a SCSI card in it? If so I would use SCSI. If not I would give one of the newer 10k SATA drives a spin. Larry - Original Message - From: "Fagyal Csongor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 12:03 PM Subject: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI Hi List, I am putting in a separate disk for our MySQL (4.1.7) server. I have some MyISAM, some InnoDB tables. Lots of reads, lots of writes (mostly atomic ones, insert/update one row), a few million rows per table, approx. 100-400 queries per second. What would you say is better (with respect to performance): a small SCSI disk (say 18G, 10kRPM) or a bigger SATA (say 120G, 7200RPM)? Thank you for your feeback, - Csongor -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Low-end SATA vs. SCSI
Hi List, I am putting in a separate disk for our MySQL (4.1.7) server. I have some MyISAM, some InnoDB tables. Lots of reads, lots of writes (mostly atomic ones, insert/update one row), a few million rows per table, approx. 100-400 queries per second. What would you say is better (with respect to performance): a small SCSI disk (say 18G, 10kRPM) or a bigger SATA (say 120G, 7200RPM)? Thank you for your feeback, - Csongor -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
