| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Sorting Improvements for 8.4 |
| Date: | 2007-12-20 02:49:11 |
| Message-ID: | 87odcm9j2w.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>> Benchmarking a single system will really only explain that system.
>> Someone may have a disk farm with 2GB/Sec throughput
>> But such a configuration is very unlikely.
>
> If you believe comments like those at
> http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/1792-Do-it-yourself-X4500.html it's possible
> to hit >2GB/s total to the 48 disks in one of the Sun X4500 servers, which
> start at $24K. May be unlikely to you, but I was reading there after I set one
> up last night, and that's a boring standard configuration for some Sun and
> Greenplum customers.
Surely such machines have kickass memory backplanes too though? How could it
ever be reasonable to have an i/o controller with more bandwidth than your
memory?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Mayer | 2007-12-20 03:17:21 | Re: Sorting Improvements for 8.4 |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-12-20 02:45:49 | Re: Sorting Improvements for 8.4 |