| From: | Dennis Gearon <gearond(at)fireserve(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PgSQL General ML <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Server recommendations |
| Date: | 2003-10-03 16:49:47 |
| Message-ID: | 3F7DA8AB.8080806@fireserve.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Actually,
I don't need something so big as that, and the people who are going
to be using this don't have the kind of IT dept that can maintain it. It
needs to be a standard PC based architecture, just server grade.
Opteron - PC compatible, by Intel?
Opteron - Costs vs Xeon or Pentium?
Ron Johnson wrote:
>On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 10:37, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>
>
>>Christopher Browne wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Oops! gearond(at)fireserve(dot)net (Dennis Gearon) was seen spray-painting on a wall:
>>>
>>>
>[snip]
>
>
>> From what I read on postgresql lists, it seems that opteron based machines are
>>doing quite a good job as database server with right kind of disk. You could
>>look at any such machine for database server..
>>
>>Check this..
>>
>>http://www.polywell.com/us/rackservers/poly1u2c.asp
>>http://www.opteronics.com/opteron-servers.htm
>>
>>IMO they could be better machine for databases. Get a 64 bit linux kernel and
>>run 32 bit postgresql on it. Should work like a charm..
>>
>>
>
>Why not run 64-bit PG on the 64-bit kernel? A bunch of distros
>are releasing support for the AMD64 this month.
>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-03 16:50:25 | Re: Slow SELECT |
| Previous Message | Holger Marzen | 2003-10-03 16:34:27 | Re: book on advanced postgresql? |