Re: Database performance
Christopher L. Everett wrote:
>>1) Dedicate a second hard drive to the database files
> I'm not sure that would be a huge win, since the performance would just
> be that of another IDE drive.
No, not huge, but it does mean that the rest of the system won't be stealing
disk I/O from your database.
>>3) Some form of RAID (preferably hardware)
> I just read an email of the Linux kernel list saying that Linux software
> RAID kicks the ass of most hardware raid solutions.
Probably depends on who makes the hardware. Given the choice, I would still
prefer hardware RAID - less load on the system, and simpler to manage.
> IIRC, RAID 1 gives the best performance under all conditions :), though
> it's not terribly safe.
I think you have RAID 0 and 1 reversed.
RAID 0: Striping; no redundancy
RAID 1: Mirroring
> So here asre some of the lower cost options I'm considering:
> SCSI: a multichannel (3 or 4) U160 or better host adapter and several
> lightly used 36GB U160 or better drives, software raid 5.
> SATA: a 3Ware SATA controller, and several SATA drives in a hardware RAID
> 5 configuration.
> I suspect the first option would run a touch faster.