Re: Hardware recommendation: which is best

From: Franz(dot)Rasper(at)izb(dot)de
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: phoenix(dot)kiula(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: Hardware recommendation: which is best
Date: 2007-09-11 12:42:24
Message-ID: 11EC9A592C31034C88965C87AF18C2A702B8369D@m0000s61
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

It depends what you want to do with your database.

Do you have many reads (select) or a lot of writes (update,insert) ?
You should use a hardware raid controller with battery backup write cache
(write cache should be greater than 256 MB).

.. heavy duty production server ?

How much memory do you have ?

How big is your database, tables ... ?

Greetings,

-Franz

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] Im Auftrag von Phoenix Kiula
Gesendet: Dienstag, 11. September 2007 13:49
An: Postgres General
Betreff: [GENERAL] Hardware recommendation: which is best

Hello

We're trying to look for the most optimal config for a heavy duty
production server, and the following two are falling in the same price
range from our supplier:

Option 1:
2 x 300GB SCSI (10k rpm) with SAS and RAID 1

Option 2:
4 x 300GB SATA2 (7200 rpm, server grade) with RAID 10

I am not sure how the pricing comes so similar with such different
RAID options, but given the two above I think the second option will
be better for a high volume server where Postgres is the main
application? The only reason I ask is because of so many websites, and
threads on this list, that trump the advantages of SCSI. Many thanks
for any advice!

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alban Hertroys 2007-09-11 12:43:38 Re: ANY
Previous Message Richard Huxton 2007-09-11 12:01:27 Re: Partial index with regexp not working