Re: Which processor runs better for Postgresql?

Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 13:02, Steve Poe wrote:
>> I have a client who is running Postgresql 7.4.x series database
>> (required to use 7.4.x). They are planning an upgrade to a new server.
>> They are insistent on Dell.
>
> Do they have a logical reason for this, or is it mostly hand-waving?

They probably do. They have probably standardized on Dell hardware. It
is technically a dumb reason, but from a business standpoint it makes sense.

  My
> experience has been hand waving.  Last company I was at, the CIO bragged
> about having saved a million a year on server by going with Dell.  His
> numbers were made up, and, in fact, we spent a large portion of each
> week babysitting those god awful 2600 series machines with adaptec cards
> and the serverworks chipset.  And they were slow compared to anything
> else with similar specs.

You can get extremely competitive quotes from IBM or HP as long as you
say, "You are competing against Dell".

> Dells tend to perform poorly, period.  They choose low end parts (the
> 2600's Serverworks chipset is widely regarded as one of the slowest
> chipset for the P-IV there is.) and then mucking around with the BIOS of
> the add in cards to make them somewhat stable with their dodgy hardware.

I can confirm this.

>> I am hoping the client is willing to wait for Dell to ship a AMD
>> Opeteron-based server.

Tell them to go with an HP DL 385. They will be much happier.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


--

    === 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/