From: | "Mitch Vincent" <mitch(at)huntsvilleal(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)wallace(dot)ece(dot)rice(dot)edu>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Don Baccus" <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: system usage stats (Was: Re: Why Not MySQL? ) |
Date: | 2000-05-04 17:58:09 |
Message-ID: | 041101bfb5f2$4e9899c0$4100000a@venux.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Production 10k, development 7.2k RPM :-)
- Mitch
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
To: Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm(at)wallace(dot)ece(dot)rice(dot)edu>; Tom Lane
<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: system usage stats (Was: Re: [HACKERS] Why Not MySQL? )
> At 11:03 AM 5/4/00 -0500, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
>
> >So, 6.5.3 is running on Ultra 160 drives, with the controller throttled
to
> >80 MB/s, and 7.0 is running on Ultra 2 drives, which also has a
controller
> >maximum of 80 MB/s. However, the sustained transfer speed of the drives
> >themselves are what should be limiting: if they're all relatively modern
> >drives, 20MB/s is typical, so neither config will max out the controller.
> >(2 drives each, right?)
>
> Not to mention that seek times make it very difficult to max out
> a controller even if theoretically possible with four drives, unless
> you're striping and doing large transfers or lookaheads, etc.
>
> If one's got 10K drives and the other 7.2K drives, you'll certainly
> see a difference in transfer rate and seek time.
>
> So ... what are the disk configurations?
>
>
>
> - Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
> Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
> http://donb.photo.net.
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-05-04 18:16:05 | Re: pg_group_name_index corrupt? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-05-04 17:52:25 | Re: pg_group_name_index corrupt? |