Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
От | Dave Cramer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 0F3B99E2-4575-42B8-8AAC-3FE4B231348C@fastcrypt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( ("Luke Lonergan" <llonergan@greenplum.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases (
Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( Re: Hardware/OS recommendations for large databases ( |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 18-Nov-05, at 1:07 AM, Luke Lonergan wrote: > Greg, > > > On 11/17/05 9:17 PM, "Greg Stark" <gsstark@mit.edu> wrote: > >> Ok, a more productive point: it's not really the size of the >> database that >> controls whether you're I/O bound or CPU bound. It's the available >> I/O >> bandwidth versus your CPU speed. > > Postgres + Any x86 CPU from 2.4GHz up to Opteron 280 is CPU bound > after > 110MB/s of I/O. This is true of Postgres 7.4, 8.0 and 8.1. > > A $1,000 system with one CPU and two SATA disks in a software RAID0 > will > perform exactly the same as a $80,000 system with 8 dual core CPUs > and the > world's best SCSI RAID hardware on a large database for decision > support > (what the poster asked about). Now there's an interesting line drawn in the sand. I presume you have numbers to back this up ? This should draw some interesting posts. Dave > > Regards, > > - Luke > > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match >
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: