From: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |
Date: | 2005-01-28 15:29:58 |
Message-ID: | 20050128152958.GA9076@phlogiston.dyndns.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 04:02:39PM +0100, Hervé Piedvache wrote:
>
> I don't insist about have data in RAM .... but when you use PostgreSQL with
> big database you know that for quick access just for reading the index file
> for example it's better to have many RAM as possible ... I just want to be
> able to get a quick access with a growing and growind database ...
Well, in any case, you need much better hardware than you're looking
at. I mean, dual Xeon with 2 Gig isn't hardly big iron. Why don't
you try benchmarking on a honking big box -- IBM P690 or a big Sun
(I'd counsel against that, though) or something like that? Or even
some Opterons. Dual Xeon is probablt your very worst choice at the
moment.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
Information security isn't a technological problem. It's an economics
problem.
--Bruce Schneier
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2005-01-28 15:31:38 | Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |
Previous Message | Pallav Kalva | 2005-01-28 15:15:50 | Poor Performance on Postgres 8.0 |