Re: hardware performance and some more
От | Roman Fail |
---|---|
Тема | Re: hardware performance and some more |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9B1C77393DED0D4B9DAA1AA1742942DA3BCCB9@pos_pdc.posportal.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | hardware performance and some more (Kasim Oztoprak <kasim@saglik.gov.tr>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
> Now, the second question is related to the performance of the database. Assuming we have a > dell's poweredge 6650 with 4 x 2.8 Ghz Xeon processors having 2 MB of cache for each, with the > main memory of lets say 32 GB. We can either use a small SAN from EMC or we can put all disks > into the machines with the required raid confiuration. > > We will install RedHat Advanced Server 2.1 to the machine as the operating system and postgresql as > the database server. We have a database having 25 millions records having the length of 250 bytes > on average for each record. And there are 1000 operators accessing the database concurrently. The main > operation on the database (about 95%) is select rather than insert, so do you have any idea about > the performance of the system? I have a very similar installation: Dell PE6600 with dual 2.0 Xeons/2MB cache, 4 GB memory, 6-disk RAID-10 for data, 2-diskRAID-1 for RH Linux 8. My database has over 60 million records averaging 200 bytes per tuple. I have a large nightlydata load, then very complex multi-table join queries all day with a few INSERT transactions. While I do not have1000 concurrent users (more like 30 for me), my processors and disks seem to be idle the vast majority of the time -this machine is overkill. So I think you will have no problem with your hardware, and could probably easily get away withonly two processors. Someday, if you can determine with certainty that the CPU is a bottleneck, drop in the 3rd and4th processors (and $10,000). And save yourself money on the RAM as well - it's incredibly easy to put in more if youneed it. If you really want to spend money, set up the fastest disk arrays you can imagine. I cannot emphasize enough: allocate a big chunk of time for tuning your database and learning from this list. I migratedfrom Microsoft SQL Server. Out of the box PostgreSQL was horrible for me, and even after significant tuning it crawledon certain queries (compared to MSSQL). The list helped me find a data type mismatch in a JOIN clause, and sincethen the performance of PostgreSQL has blown the doors off of MSSQL. Since I only gave myself a couple days to do tuningbefore the db had to go in production, I almost had to abandon PostgreSQL and revert to MS. My problems were solvedin the nick of time, but I really wish I had made more time for tuning. Running strong in production for 7 months now with PostgreSQL 7.3, and eagerly awaiting 7.4! Roman Fail POS Portal, Inc.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: