[Peter Koczan - Wed at 10:56:54AM -0600] > We're considering setting up a SAN where I work. Is there anyone using > a SAN, for postgres or other purposes? If so I have a few questions > for you. Some time ago, my boss was planning to order more hardware - including a SAN - and coincidentally, SANs were discussed at this list as well. The consensus on this list seemed to be that running postgres on SAN is not cost efficiently - one would get better performance for a lower cost if the database host is connected directly to the disks - and also, buying the wrong SAN can cause quite some problems. My boss (with good help of the local SAN-pusher) considered that the arguments against the SAN solution on this list was not really valid for an "enterprise" user. The SAN-pusher really insisted that through a state-of-the-art SAN theoretically it should be possible to achieve far better bandwidth as well as lower latency to the disks. Personally, I don't have the clue, but all my colleagues believes him, so I guess he is right ;-) What I'm told is that the state-of-the-art SAN allows for an "insane amount" of hard disks to be installed, much more than what would fit into any decent database server. We've ended up buying a SAN, the physical installation was done last week, and I will be able to tell in some months if it was a good idea after all, or not. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
