Re: Hardware recommendation: which is best

From: "Phoenix Kiula" <phoenix(dot)kiula(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hardware recommendation: which is best
Date: 2007-09-11 16:26:51
Message-ID: e373d31e0709110926i371bf45fuf132210255e138c2@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Thanks Greg.

> You're not going to get a particularly useful answer here without giving
> some specifics about the two disk controllers you're comparing, how much
> cache they have, and whether they include a battery backup.
>

Scenario 1, SATAII:

- Server: Asus RS120-E4/PA4 Dedicated Server
- CPU: Single -- Intel Quad Core Xeon Processor x3210 Processor 2.13Ghz
- RAM: 4Gb DDR2 Memory 667Mhz
- Hard disk: 4 x Seagate ES SATAII HardDrive 7200RPM 250Gb (Total 500Gb)
- Raid 10: 3Ware Raid 9650SE: http://www.acnc.com/04_01_10.html

Scenario 2, SCSI:

- Server: IBM e326m 1U Rackmount server
- CPU: Double -- Opteron 275 is 2 x 2.2GHz, with 2 x 1MB L2 Cache
- RAM: 4Gb PC3200 ECC Registered
- Hard disk: 2 x 300GB SCSI 10K RPM
- Raid 1: LSI Logic

Would appreciate any tips. From these two, Scenario 1 looks marginally
better to me. I am requesting further information about cache and
battery powered backup, but would appreciate first-off thoughts based
on above info.

TIA!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Kretschmer 2007-09-11 16:27:37 Re: creating/dropping tables inside functions?
Previous Message Rodrigo De León 2007-09-11 16:10:49 Re: avg() of array values