From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 24 11:58:18 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2C9516A403 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:58:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Received: from kagate.punkt.de (kagate.punkt.de [217.29.33.131]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDED843D79 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:58:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Received: from hugo10.ka.punkt.de (hugo10.ka.punkt.de [10.0.0.110]) by kagate1.punkt.de with ESMTP id k9OBwC6G014071 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:58:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hugo10.ka.punkt.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hugo10.ka.punkt.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k9OBwBa9010599; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:58:11 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ry93@hugo10.ka.punkt.de) Received: (from ry93@localhost) by hugo10.ka.punkt.de (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id k9OBwBhB010598; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:58:11 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ry93) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:58:11 +0200 From: "Patrick M. Hausen" To: Chuck Swiger Message-ID: <20061024115811.GA10499@hugo10.ka.punkt.de> References: <453D49D2.1010705@rogers.com> <3861E2E8-4232-4C46-8D0A-1B6079BCA07D@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3861E2E8-4232-4C46-8D0A-1B6079BCA07D@mac.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Cc: Mike Jakubik , stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Running large DB's on FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:58:18 -0000 Hello! On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 04:10:19PM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote: > As for the disk configuration, using RAID-5 is one of the worst > possible choices for a database; using multiple RAID-1 mirrors or a > RAID-10 config would probably do a lot better in terms of performance > and reliability. I second that. And I just want to add: you can easily and reliably run this configuration in software by the means of gmirror and gstripe. Saves you some $$ that you would have spent on a "hardware RAID controller". And it's neither slower nor less reliable. For anything besides RAID 5, 6 or similar (and you don't want RAID 5 for a transaction heavy system) there is no need for dedicated hardware anymore. Just get a decent SCSI system with a hot plug backplane, of course. HTH, Patrick -- punkt.de GmbH Internet - Dienstleistungen - Beratung Vorholzstr. 25 Tel. 0721 9109 -0 Fax: -100 76137 Karlsruhe http://punkt.de