From: | Steve Poe <steve(dot)poe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql? |
Date: | 2006-06-14 15:03:25 |
Message-ID: | 1150297405.12280.15.camel@amd64-gentoo-laptop |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Dave, Joshua, Scott (and all),
Thanks for your feedback, while I do appreciate it, I did not intent on
making this discussion "buy this instead"...I whole-heartly agree with
you. Joshua, you made the best comment, it is a business decision for
the client. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. I've recommended
Sun or Penguin Computing which I've had no technical issues with. They
did not dispute my recommendation but they ignored it. I have not like
Dell, on the server side, since 1998 - 2000 time period.
Excluding Dell's issues, has anyone seen performance differences between
AMD's Opteron and Intel's new Xeon's (dual or quad CPU or dual-core). If
anyone has done benchmark comparisons between them, any summary
information would be appreciated.
For now, I am asking the client to hold-off and wait for the AMD Opteron
availability on the Dell servers.
Thanks again.
Steve
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-06-14 15:16:39 | Re: how to partition disks |
Previous Message | John E. Vincent | 2006-06-14 14:47:01 | Performance of pg_dump on PGSQL 8.0 |