Tom's Hardware > Forum > Storage > Hard Disks > best database performance? I R DUMB.

best database performance? I R DUMB.

Forum Storage : Hard Disks - best database performance? I R DUMB.

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
milwsysbuilder   07-23-2007 at 03:24:20 AM

What type of hard drive configuration would give me the best database performance? I need the best possible performance and money isn't an issue barring ridiculous suggestions (e.g. 4 HDs isn't ridiculous, 40 is).

What are flash hard drives good for?

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
Joe_The_Dragon   07-23-2007 at 04:00:18 AM
- 0 +

a setup with a HARDWARE raid card on the pci-e or pci-x bus and do not put a pci-x card in a pci slot.

Reply to Joe_The_Dragon
milwsysbuilder   07-23-2007 at 04:33:06 AM
- 0 +

This is what I don't understand ... what do these tests measure, and why are these results the way they are ?

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/0 [...] bsoletism/ (page 7)


Message edited by milwsysbuilder on 07-23-2007 at 08:10:48 AM
Reply to milwsysbuilder
milwsysbuilder   07-23-2007 at 08:09:49 AM
- 0 +


btw, this is going to be 99.9+% read, so should I use RAID 1?

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by milwsysbuilder on 07-23-2007 at 08:10:14 AM
Reply to milwsysbuilder
SomeJoe7777   07-23-2007 at 05:34:34 PM
- 0 +

How big is this database, what database program is being used, how many people are accessing it at once, and what kind of server (and specs) is this running on?

------------------------------ - SomeJoe7777

"Did he dazzle you with his extensive knowledge of mineral water? Or was it his in-depth analysis of, uh, uh, Marky Mark that finally reeled you in?" - Troy Dyer (Ethan Hawke), Reality Bites, 1994
 Reply to SomeJoe7777
milwsysbuilder   07-23-2007 at 06:45:25 PM
- 0 +

100GB, postgresql, ~48 full searches per minute to start, w/e it takes

Message quoted 1 times
Reply to milwsysbuilder
rodney_ws   07-23-2007 at 07:28:44 PM
- 0 +

milwsysbuilder wrote :

btw, this is going to be 99.9+% read, so should I use RAID 1?


I think you got your RAIDs mixed up if you're considering RAID 1 for performance. Perhaps you should consult Google?

Reply to rodney_ws
SomeJoe7777   07-23-2007 at 07:39:12 PM
- 0 +

milwsysbuilder wrote :

100GB, postgresql, ~48 full searches per minute to start, w/e it takes



Well, there are several ways you can go, but if you're looking for a single self-contained server (i.e. processors + memory + storage) together, I'd do the following:

  • 4x 146GB 15K RPM SAS drives (Seagate Cheetah 15K.5, model ST3146855SS)
  • RAID 10 configuration
  • LSI MegaRAID SAS 8408E (PCI Express x8, 8 port, SAS, hardware CPU, 256K Battery-backed cache)


If you want to go to external solutions for more storage and/or more speed, then we're talking moving into Fibre Channel or iSCSI SANs, and you really need a consultant familiar with the equipment you're going to buy to do an assessment of your needs.

Message quoted 1 times
------------------------------ - SomeJoe7777

"Did he dazzle you with his extensive knowledge of mineral water? Or was it his in-depth analysis of, uh, uh, Marky Mark that finally reeled you in?" - Troy Dyer (Ethan Hawke), Reality Bites, 1994
 Reply to SomeJoe7777
darkangelism   07-23-2007 at 08:29:13 PM
- 0 +

SomeJoe7777 wrote :

Well, there are several ways you can go, but if you're looking for a single self-contained server (i.e. processors + memory + storage) together, I'd do the following:

  • 4x 146GB 15K RPM SAS drives (Seagate Cheetah 15K.5, model ST3146855SS)
  • RAID 10 configuration
  • LSI MegaRAID SAS 8408E (PCI Express x8, 8 port, SAS, hardware CPU, 256K Battery-backed cache)


If you want to go to external solutions for more storage and/or more speed, then we're talking moving into Fibre Channel or iSCSI SANs, and you really need a consultant familiar with the equipment you're going to buy to do an assessment of your needs.




I agree with that, though you could go with 6 or 8 drives

Reply to darkangelism
flasher702   07-23-2007 at 08:38:35 PM
- 0 +

SomeJoe7777 is pretty much correct. I'd go for more than 4 drives though. If it's almost entirely read transactions you could get the performance you need out of SATA drives but they may not be up to the duty cycle.

Fibre Channel raid arrays are ussually for arrays larger than 8 drives... usually much larger, and I would suggest buying a complete system (which would almost definitely come with one of the InSpeed SOC chips I work on in it) rather than trying to make your own.

------------------------------ F@H
$$$ Looking to recruit a few good firmware developers, a mechanical engineer, and a senior hw+sw test technician in the Seattle area. PM me for details.
 Reply to flasher702
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Storage > Hard Disks > best database performance? I R DUMB.
Go to:

There are 1214 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.741 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?