2nd hard disk for MySQL/PostgreSQL database under RedHat 7.2

[jabr at blu.org (John Abreau)]

"Jerry Feldman" <gaf at blu.org> writes:

> SCSI vs. EIDE.
> JABR mentiuoned that it is best to use SCSI if one has a SCSI controller. However, I remember 
> seeing recently that IDE (or EIDE) today will give you just as good performance. 
> 
> Today, IDE drives are still significantly less expensive than SCSI:
> eg. A 7200RPM 100GB EIDE drive is about $175, and  the largest SCSI I could find is 73.4GB 
> (10,000RPM) for about $465. 

There's no question that IDE is cheaper; this is a classic case of getting
what you pay for.

I've read those same claims about EIDE performance. I've also compared the
performance on my systems, and my experience shows me that the claims are
not justified.

I've used EIDE drives with DMA turned on to max out the performance, and
still when I play mp3 audio or mpeg video, it sounds like crap if I'm
doing anything else (like reading mail or browsing the web). On the same 
systems, after unmounting the EIDE drive and playing the audio or video 
from an older and supposedly much slower SCSI drive, I get smooth, 
uninterrupted performance.

I find that I get tons of dropped frames when pulling a DV stream off
the firewire card onto the ide drive, even if nothing else is touching 
the drive. Using the scsi drive, I don't have this problem.


-- 
John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix 
ICQ 28611923 / AIM abreauj / JABBER jabr at jabber.org / YAHOO abreauj
Email jabr at blu.org / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0xD5C7B5D9
PGP-Key-Fingerprint 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 344 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.blu.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20020225/fb4edb39/attachment.sig>