Re: Sun Fire T2000 and PostgreSQL 8.1.3

From: Leigh Dyer <leigh(at)eclinic(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
Cc: "Juan Casero (FL FLC)" <Juan(dot)Casero(at)wholefoods(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Sun Fire T2000 and PostgreSQL 8.1.3
Date: 2006-04-06 04:47:00
Message-ID: 44349D44.10902@eclinic.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Luke Lonergan wrote:
> Leigh,
>
> On 4/5/06 9:23 PM, "Leigh Dyer" <leigh(at)eclinic(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
>
>> We've got a Sun Fire V40z and it's quite a nice machine -- 6x 15krpm
>> drives, 4GB RAM, and a pair of Opteron 850s. This gives us more than
>> enough power now for what we need, but it's nice to know that we can
>> shoehorn a lot more RAM, and up it to eight CPU cores if needed.
>
> We have one of these too - ours is signed by Scott McNealy.
>
Nice :)

>> The newer Sun Opteron systems look nice too, but unless you're using
>> external storage, their little 2.5" hard drives may not be ideal.
>
> Yes - but they end-of-lifed the V20z and V40z!
>
That's quite disappointing to hear -- our V40z isn't even six months
old! We're not a big company, so external storage solutions are outside
our price range, but we still wanted a nice brand-name box, and the V40z
was a great deal compared to smaller boxes like the HP DL385.

> One big problem with the sun line in general is the tiny internal storage
> capacity - already too small on the V40z at 5/6 drives, now ridiculous at 4
> SAS drives on the galaxy series.
I'm sure those little SAS drives would be great for web servers and
other non-IO-intensive tasks though -- I'd love to get some X4100s in to
replace our Poweredge 1750s for that. It's a smart move overall IMHO,
but it's certainly not great for database serving.

Thanks
Leigh
>
> - Luke
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Mair 2006-04-06 06:01:09 Re: bad performance on Solaris 10
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2006-04-06 04:35:14 Re: bad performance on Solaris 10