[GENERAL] RAM, the more the merrier?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Willy-Bas Loos
Тема [GENERAL] RAM, the more the merrier?
Дата
Msg-id CAHnozTjx4rLfsDk-mE3XqZ+90sazn4EZEy80PH7JdBmn8gMYBw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответы Re: [GENERAL] RAM, the more the merrier?
Re: [GENERAL] RAM, the more the merrier?
Re: [GENERAL] RAM, the more the merrier?
Список pgsql-general
Дерево обсуждения
Hi,

We have a postgresql database that is now 1.4TB in disksize and slowly growing.
In the past, we've had (read) performance trouble with this database and the solution was to buy a server that can fit the db into memory. It had 0.5 TB of RAM and at the time it could hold all of the data easily.
Those servers are now old and the db has outgrown the RAM and we are doing more reads and writes too (but the problem has not yet returned).

So i am looking into buying new servers. I'm thinking of equipping it with 1TB of RAM and room to expand. So the database will not fit completely, but largely anyway. Also, if we can afford it, it will have SSDs instead of RAID10 SAS spindles.

But I've read that there is some kind of maximum to the shared_buffers, where increasing it would actually decrease performance.
Is 1TB of RAM, or even 2TB always a good thing?
And is there anything special that I should look out for when configuring such a server?
Or would it be much better to buy 2 smaller servers and tie them together somehow? (partitioning, replication, ...)

--
Willy-Bas Loos

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Чтобы сделать работу с сайтом удобнее, мы используем cookie и аналитический сервис «Яндекс.Метрика». Продолжая пользоваться сайтом, вы соглашаетесь с их использованием.