Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI

2004-11-13 Thread andy thomas
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

2004-11-12 Thread Larry Lowry
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]


Re: Low-end SATA vs. SCSI

2004-11-12 Thread Gary Richardson
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

2004-11-12 Thread Ugo Bellavance
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

2004-11-12 Thread Larry Lowry
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

2004-11-12 Thread Kirti S. Bajwa
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]