From: | Alexander Farber <alexander(dot)farber(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: For a LAPP setup what is better: 1 fast or 2 slower machines |
Date: | 2011-07-09 19:08:19 |
Message-ID: | CAADeyWioQgZe44DqBsq5rPwCj30mrjUe=FNGQeJxHRE6e5YdOA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi,
On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Farber
> <alexander(dot)farber(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> 1) 2 machines with i7-920 Quad-Core
>> 8 GB RAM, 2 x 750 GB SATA-II HDD
>> (Software-RAID 1)
>>
>> 2) 1 machine i7-980X Hexa-Core
>> 24 GB RAM, 1 x 1,5 TB SATA II
>
> 2 machines for two reasons. 1: separating out app from db server
> means it's way easier to figure out which is acting up should you have
> a performance problem. 2: the dual machines have RAID-1 hard drives,
> the single machine just has one big 1.5TB drive. No way would I run a
> production system on a single drive, especially considering how cheap
> hard drives are nowadays.
>
and where to run the pgbouncer,
probably on the Apache machine?
Regards
Alex
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Darren Duncan | 2011-07-09 20:07:25 | Re: [HACKERS] Creating temp tables inside read only transactions |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2011-07-09 16:53:59 | Re: For a LAPP setup what is better: 1 fast or 2 slower machines |