Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: dell versus hp

From: Jurgen Haan <jurgen(at)easyflex(dot)nl>
To: Tore Halset <halset(at)pvv(dot)ntnu(dot)no>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: dell versus hp
Date: 2007-11-09 16:01:08
Message-ID: 47348444.6000700@easyflex.nl (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Apart from the disks, you might also investigate using Opterons instead
of Xeons. there appears to be some significant dent in performance
between Opteron and Xeon. Xeons appear to spend more time in passing
around ownership of memory cache lines in case of a spinlock.
It's not yet clear whether or not here has been worked around the issue.
You should at least investigate it a bit.

We're using a HP DL385 ourselves which performs quite well.

-R-

Tore Halset wrote:
> Hello.

> 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
> 


In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Greg SmithDate: 2007-11-09 16:11:18
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs MySQL, and FreeBSD
Previous:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2007-11-09 15:57:33
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs MySQL, and FreeBSD

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group