Re: 3 disks configured RAID 0 over 10 disks configured in RAID 5 (self replicating SAN)

[Rene Romero Benavides <rene.romero.b@xxxxxxxxx>]

First of all, thank you so much for your valuable time.

It probably does, though we have a requirement of having available at least twice the expected database size, and 50% of disk space overhead sounds like too much for us to take in a replicated SAN environment and a PostgreSQL master/slave - streaming replication setup.

our options regarding disks availability at the moment are:

 a 3 disks array dedicated for PostgreSQL in any RAID configuration we'd like 

OR

a 10 disks array shared with 14 virtual machines running the middleware layer and the application infrastructure in a RAID 5 configuration

again, I do really appreciate your kindly help.

2013/8/28 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@xxxxxxxxx>

Does your controller support odd number RAID-10 i.e. RAID 1E?  If so
then 3 disks in RAID-1E. Or better 10 disks in 1E

On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Rene Romero Benavides
<rene.romero.b@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks for your attention.
> What would you choose for a postgresql installation: 3 disks configured with
> RAID 0 (in a self replicating SAN) over 10 disks configured with RAID 5
> (also in a self replicating SAN) , we have space constraints that prohibit
> us from choosing RAID 1+0.
> I've been persuaded to choose RAID 5, because writes and parity computation
> will be spread over 10 disks compensating write overhead providing a better
> level of data security.
>
> Do you think it was a good decision? Any comment will be appreciated. Have a
> good day.
>
> --
> El genio es 1% inspiración y 99% transpiración.
> Thomas Alva Edison
> http://pglearn.blogspot.mx/
>

--
To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.

--
El genio es 1% inspiración y 99% transpiración.
Thomas Alva Edison
http://pglearn.blogspot.mx/