Re: Table Partitioning in Postgres:
scott.marlowe <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>
From: "scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>
To: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
Cc: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Date: 2003-02-20T16:02:06Z
Lists: pgsql-general
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Christopher Browne wrote: > In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, greg@CopelandConsulting.Net (Greg Copeland) transmitted: > > While I have read that many expect serial ATA to seriously challenge > > SCSI I honestly have no idea where the rhetoric stops and reality > > begins. I'd hazard a guess we'll really not know the whole truth until > > samples become widely available from multiple sources including drives, > > drivers, and host interfaces. > > I'd see Serial ATA being a "serious challenger" if it allowed you to > cheaply build some "embarrassingly-parallel" RAID servers where you > were able to get 16 drives hooked up, each on its own ATA 'bus' for > about the price of 4-way SCSI. > > But the intended market is doubtless the super-price-conscious market, > which naturally leads to the overall quality of the results being > pretty compromised. These guys: http://www.ide-raid.com/ will probably make use of serial ata, since they're already making some very nice, very fast IDE based RAID devices, and very dense (12 disk 3U units.)