Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 444E6F41.8000102@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Large (8M) cache vs. dual-core CPUs (Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Bill Moran wrote: > I've been given the task of making some hardware recommendations for > the next round of server purchases. The machines to be purchased > will be running FreeBSD & PostgreSQL. > > Where I'm stuck is in deciding whether we want to go with dual-core > pentiums with 2M cache, or with HT pentiums with 8M cache. Dual Core Opterons :) Joshua D. Drake > > Both of these are expensive bits of hardware, and I'm trying to > gather as much evidence as possible before making a recommendation. > The FreeBSD community seems pretty divided over which is likely to > be better, and I have been unable to discover a method for estimating > how much of the 2M cache on our existing systems is being used. > > Does anyone in the PostgreSQL community have any experience with > large caches or dual-core pentiums that could make any recommendations? > Our current Dell 2850 systems are CPU bound - i.e. they have enough > RAM, and fast enough disks that the CPUs seem to be the limiting > factor. As a result, this decision on what kind of CPUs to get in > the next round of servers is pretty important. > > Any advice is much appreciated. > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: