From: | "Reid Thompson" <Reid(dot)Thompson(at)ateb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Andrzej Zawadzki" <zawadaa(at)wp(dot)pl>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Quad Xeon or Quad Opteron? |
Date: | 2008-05-23 12:50:23 |
Message-ID: | 7C0800F63CCF4149AC0FC5EE2A04122611FCF5@sr002-2k3exc.ateb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
This may be of interest...
http://weblog.infoworld.com/yager/archives/2008/05/ahead_of_the_cu_4.html
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-performance-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org on behalf of Andrzej Zawadzki
Sent: Fri 5/23/2008 6:41 AM
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: [PERFORM] Quad Xeon or Quad Opteron?
Hello,
We're planning new production server for PostgreSQL and I'm wondering
which processor (or even platform) will be better: Quad Xeon or Quad
Opteron (for example SUN now has a new offer Sun Fire X4440 x64).
When I was buying my last database server, then SUN v40z was a really
very good choice (Intel's base server was slower). This v40z still works
pretty good but I need one more.
AFAIK Intel made some changes in chipset but... is this better then AMD
HyperTransport and Direct Connect Architecture from database point of
view? How about L3 cache - is this important for performance?
Do You have any opinions? Suggestions?
Thanks,
Best regards
--
Andrzej Zawadzki
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jessica Richard | 2008-05-23 13:21:17 | index performance on large tables with update and insert |
Previous Message | Knight, Doug | 2008-05-23 12:36:38 | Re: Quad Xeon or Quad Opteron? |