Re: run httpd and postgresql on different machines ?
От | Ron Mayer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: run httpd and postgresql on different machines ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 41EDAE8E.8030604@cheapcomplexdevices.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | run httpd and postgresql on different machines ? (Chuming Chen <chen@musc.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-admin |
Chuming Chen wrote: > > I want to set up a web site using apache httpd, php and postgresql. From > the performance point of view, which architecture is better? 1) Run > httpd and postgresql on the same machine; 2) Run postgresql on seperate > machine. My concern is that the machine I am going to run httpd has > limitted storage. I am expecting the increasing of postgresql database > once I set it ip. I had good luck with 4 very cheap (small, used, 1CPU, IDE disk) machines running httpd/php/MONO-ASP.NET, and 1 more expensived machine (with some internal failover capabilities - dual power supplies, with a RAID array, with a support contract) running postgresql. The reasoning was one of cost/performance with the ability to have likely-to-fail components fail with no downtime. The cheapest way to scale the front-end machines with failover capabilities was to use sub-$1000 slightly obsolete PCs. The cheapest way I knew to provide limited scalability and failover (at least for disk) for a database was a raid array. With some of the newer replication features or pgpool, it might be easier to scale "out" instead of "up"; but I have no experience making that determination. How about the rest of you guys.... If CPU demands in my database get to the point of needing 5-CPUs with a read-mostly (90%) system, am I better off with 1 lots of replication between small servers or 2 scaling up a bigserver. (the reason I'm CPU bound instead of disk bound is that many of my queries are spatial operations with PostGIS like unions and buffers of polygons).
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: