From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Vivek Khera <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Hardware purchase question |
Date: | 2004-12-13 17:23:13 |
Message-ID: | 41BDD001.8070701@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> However, I keep getting conflicting advice. My choices are along
> these lines:
>
> Dual Xeon 64bit with built-in 6-disk RAID10 or RAID5 (LSI RAID card)
> Dual Opteron 64bit with built-in 6-disk RAID10 or RAID5 (LSI RAID card)
> Dual Opteron 64bit with external RAID via fibre channel (eg, nstor)
An Opteron, properly tuned with PostgreSQL will always beat a Xeon
in terms of raw cpu.
RAID 10 will typically always outperform RAID 5 with the same HD config.
Fibre channel in general will always beat a normal (especially an LSI) raid.
Dell's suck for PostgreSQL.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> I'm sure any of these will whip the bottom off the Dell 2650, but
> which will be the fastest overall? No way to know without spending
> lots of money to test. :-(
>
> Dell claims their new 2750 will be faster, but they've lost the battle
> already, and won't commit to any performance numbers. Won't even give
> me a ballpark number.
>
--
Command Prompt, Inc., home of PostgreSQL Replication, and plPHP.
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
jd.vcf | text/x-vcard | 640 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-12-13 18:03:03 | Re: Similar tables, different indexes performance |
Previous Message | Vivek Khera | 2004-12-13 17:19:24 | Re: Off-list Re: Alternatives to Dell? |