Re: High end server and storage for a PostgreSQL OLTP system

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Cosimo Streppone <cosimo(at)streppone(dot)it>
Cc: Postgresql Performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: High end server and storage for a PostgreSQL OLTP system
Date: 2005-02-01 04:56:45
Message-ID: 20050201045645.GC32356@decibel.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 09:41:32PM +0100, Cosimo Streppone wrote:
> 2) The goal is to make the db handle 100 tps (something like
> 100 users). What kind of server and storage should I provide?
>
> The actual servers our application runs on normally have
> 2 Intel Xeon processors, 2-4 Gb RAM, RAID 0/1/5 SCSI
> disk storage with hard drives @ 10,000 rpm

You might look at Opteron's, which theoretically have a higher data
bandwidth. If you're doing anything data intensive, like a sort in
memory, this could make a difference.

> 4) Is it correct to suppose that multiple RAID 1 arrays
> can provide the fastest I/O ?
> I usually reserve one RAID1 array to db data directory,
> one RAID1 array to pg_xlog directory and one RAID1 array
> for os and application needs.

RAID10 will be faster than RAID1. The key factor to a high performance
database is a high performance I/O system. If you look in the archives
you'll find people running postgresql on 30 and 40 drive arrays.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-02-01 05:06:27 Re: Automagic tuning
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-02-01 04:52:11 Re: Automagic tuning