From: | Elaine Lindelef <eel(at)cognitivity(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PHP + PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2002-09-20 19:48:53 |
Message-ID: | v04210101b9b12aeebda4@[172.16.2.101] |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> > Of course, a bigger box running PostgreSQL is still cheaper and
> > easier to maintain than multiple replicated servers.
>
> Cheaper? Look at the prices for two 2-cpu machines, and compare that to
>the price of one 4-cpu machine. You can get nicely equipped dual-CPU
>machines for what, $4,000 or $5,000 total? When you get into the 4-way
>machines, you'll pay that much just for the motherboard and chassis - and
>you still have thousands left to spend on the processers themselves.
>
> Besides that, two 2-CPU machines can perform much, much better than a
>single 4-way machine, because you only have half of the processers
>fighting for I/O.
>
>steve
>
Yes - but the cost of the TOTAL SOLUTION - which includes replication
software, sysadmin time, programming time and testing, etc - is still
in my experience cheaper with one big database box than two smaller
boxes, if your only purpose is to get more thruput for the $$. This
is subject to change, of course.
Hardware is cheap. People are expensive. :^)
My preferred approach has been a big DB box and an array of
webservers connecting to it.
Elaine Lindelef
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-09-20 19:54:45 | Re: Monitoring a Query |
Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2002-09-20 19:41:33 | Re: Adjustin Priority levels.. |