Re: dell versus hp
От | Tore Halset |
---|---|
Тема | Re: dell versus hp |
Дата | |
Msg-id | F800DE70-6D9C-4DA1-8E0E-3ED58C28E26A@pvv.ntnu.no обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: dell versus hp ("Claus Guttesen" <kometen@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Nov 6, 2007, at 12:36 , Claus Guttesen wrote: >> All of our existing servers are from Dell, but I want to look at some >> other options as well. We are currently looking at rack boxes with 8 >> internal SAS discs. Two mirrored for OS, Two mirrored for WAL and 4 >> in >> raid 10 for the base. >> >> Here are our current alternatives: >> >> 1) Dell 2900 (5U) >> 8 * 146 GB SAS 15Krpm 3,5" >> 8GB ram >> Perc 5/i. battery backup. 256MB ram. >> 2 * 4 Xeon 2,66GHz >> >> 2) Dell 2950 (2U) >> 8 * 146 GB SAS 10Krpm 2,5" (not really selectable, but I think the >> webshop is wrong..) >> 8GB ram >> Perc 5/i. battery backup. 256MB ram. >> 2 * 4 Xeon 2,66GHz >> >> 3) HP ProLiant DL380 G5 (2U) >> 8 * 146 GB SAS 10Krpm 2,5" >> 8GB ram >> P400 raid controller. battery backup. 512MB ram. >> 2 * 2 Xeon 3GHz >> >> All of those alternatives cost ca the same. How much (in numbers) >> better are 15K 3,5" than 10K 2,5"? What about the raid controllers? >> Any other alternatives in that price-range? > > When writing is important you want to use 15K rpm disks. I personally > use the DL380 and is very satisfied with the hardware and the buildin > ciss-controller (with 256 MB cache using 10K rpm disks). > > How much space do you need? 72 GB is the largest 15K 2.5" sas-disk > from HP. Okay, thanks. We need 100GB for the database, so 4 72GB in raid 10 will be fine. Regards, - Tore.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: