On 11/7/2012 3:17 PM, Vick Khera wrote:
My most recent big box(es) are built using all Intel 3xx series
drives. Like you said, the 7xx series was way too expensive.
I have to raise my hand to say that for us 710 series drives are an
unbelievable bargain and we buy nothing else now for producti
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Is there a comprehensive list of drives that have been tested on the
> wiki somewhere? Our current choices seem to be the Intel 3xx series
> which STILL suffer from the "whoops I'm now an 8MB drive" bug and the
> very expensive SLC 7xx series
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 02:12:39PM -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> >> >> I don't have the specs to hand, but one of them is a Kingston drive.
> >> >> Our local supplier is out of 320 series drives, so we were looking for
> >> >> others; will check out the 710s. It's crazy that so few drives can
> >>
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 01:53:47PM -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 05:41:02PM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Greg Smith wr
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 01:53:47PM -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 05:41:02PM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> >> > In general, through, diskchecker.pl is the more
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 05:41:02PM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>> > In general, through, diskchecker.pl is the more sensitive test. If it
>> > fails, storage is unreliable for PostgreSQ
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 05:41:02PM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> > In general, through, diskchecker.pl is the more sensitive test. If it
> > fails, storage is unreliable for PostgreSQL, period. It's good that you've
> > followed up by confir
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> In general, through, diskchecker.pl is the more sensitive test. If it
> fails, storage is unreliable for PostgreSQL, period. It's good that you've
> followed up by confirming the real database corruption implied by that is
> also visible. In
On 10/24/12 4:04 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
Is this a useful and plausible testing methodology? It's definitely
showed up some failures. On a hard-disk, all is well as long as the
write-back cache is disabled; on the SSDs, I can't make them reliable.
On Linux systems, you can tell when Postgres
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Scott Marlowe
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> After reading the comments last week about SSDs, I did some testing of
>>> the ones we have at work - each of my test-bo
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> After reading the comments last week about SSDs, I did some testing of
>> the ones we have at work - each of my test-boxes (three with SSDs, one
>> with HDD) subjected to multiple sta
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> After reading the comments last week about SSDs, I did some testing of
> the ones we have at work - each of my test-boxes (three with SSDs, one
> with HDD) subjected to multiple stand-alone plug-pull tests, using
> pgbench to provide load. S
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> What did you do to look for corruption? That PosgreSQL succeeds at
>> going through crash-recovery and then starting up is not a good
>> indicator that there is no corruption.
>
> I fi
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> What did you do to look for corruption? That PosgreSQL succeeds at
> going through crash-recovery and then starting up is not a good
> indicator that there is no corruption.
I fired up Postgres and looked at the logs for any signs of failure.
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> After reading the comments last week about SSDs, I did some testing of
> the ones we have at work - each of my test-boxes (three with SSDs, one
> with HDD) subjected to multiple stand-alone plug-pull tests, using
> pgbench to provide load. S
After reading the comments last week about SSDs, I did some testing of
the ones we have at work - each of my test-boxes (three with SSDs, one
with HDD) subjected to multiple stand-alone plug-pull tests, using
pgbench to provide load. So far, there've been no instances of
PostgreSQL data corruption,
16 matches
Mail list logo
