Re: Performance large tables.
От | Vivek Khera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance large tables. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BF9C491E-78B6-4144-92DC-B0A6CCC3129E@khera.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance large tables. (Franz.Rasper@izb.de) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance large tables.
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Dec 13, 2005, at 2:49 AM, Franz.Rasper@izb.de wrote: > What is the performance difference between U320 15kRPM and U320 > 10kRPM ? > Does your RAID crontoller has some memory (e.g. 128 MB or 256 MB ) > and something like memory backup write cache (like HP DL 380 server) ? > Do you use Intel or Opteron cpus ? The 15k drives have higher sustained throughput so theoretically they would be faster for sequential scans of data. I have no hard numbers about this, though. See my thread on choosing between them from last thursday. As for RAID controller, I've been using LSI MegaRAID 320-2x controller lately. I like it a lot. I configure 1/2 the disks on one channel and 1/2 on the other and RAID mirror and RAID 10 them across the channels. I *always* get battery backup for the controllers. No point not to do so. As for Intel vs. Opteron: Opteron hands down. The Intel Xeon EM64T are adequate for low-end use, but for really pushing the bits back and forth the Opterons are the top of the heap in performance.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: