| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Nunes Melo <al_nunes(at)atua(dot)com(dot)br> |
| Cc: | Pgsql-Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Better Hardware, worst Results |
| Date: | 2004-11-04 21:46:13 |
| Message-ID: | 4847.1099604773@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Alvaro Nunes Melo <al_nunes(at)atua(dot)com(dot)br> writes:
> I have a very tricky situation here. A client bought a Dell dual-machine
> to be used as Database Server, and we have a cheaper machine used in
> development. With identical databases, configuration parameters and
> running the same query, our machine is almost 3x faster.
> ==> Dell PowerEdge:
> HD: SCSI
> ==> Other machine:
> HD: IDE
I'll bet a nickel that the IDE drive is lying about write completion,
thereby gaining a significant performance boost at the cost of probable
data corruption during a power failure. SCSI drives generally tell the
truth about this, but consumer-grade IDE gear is usually configured to
lie.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pierre-Frédéric Caillaud | 2004-11-04 22:00:14 | Re: Restricting Postgres |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2004-11-04 21:16:38 | Re: Better Hardware, worst Results |