Re: Postgresql Hardware - Recommendations

From: <Christian(dot)Kastner(at)gutmann(dot)at>
To: <postgresql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postgresql Hardware - Recommendations
Date: 2005-09-07 09:04:43
Message-ID: D5550E881896C946B5D2524C265CF95B2272FE@aut-vie-w3s006.bankgutmann.co.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Andrew, Matthew, thanks to you both four your advice. I'm sorry I couldn't provide more details to the situation, I will post again as soon I get them.

Time to share your insights with the colleagues :)

Best Regards,
Chris

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Paul Ramsey [mailto:pramsey(at)refractions(dot)net]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 06. September 2005 06:13
An: Kastner Christian; Kastner Christian
Betreff: Re: [PERFORM] Postgresql Hardware - Recommendations

For a database, I would almost always prioritize:
- I/O
- RAM
- CPU

So, fast drives (SCSI 10000RPM or better in a RAID configuration,
more spindles == more throughput), then memory (more memory == more
of the database off disk in cache == faster response), then more CPU
(more concurrent request handling).

Paul

On 5-Sep-05, at 6:50 AM, <Christian(dot)Kastner(at)gutmann(dot)at>
<Christian(dot)Kastner(at)gutmann(dot)at> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> My company has decided to migrate our Oracle database to
> postgresql8. We
> will aquire a new server for this, and would very much appreciate your
> advice.
>
> NOTE: The applications accessing the database are developed and
> maintained externally, and unfortunately, the developers have not yet
> given us detailed information on their requirements. The only info
> I can
> give so far is that the database size is about 60GB, and that it
> will be
> frequently accessed by multiple users (about 100 will be connected
> during business hours). The applications accessing the database are
> mostly reporting tools.
>
> I know that the performance question will ultimately boil down to "it
> depends what you want to do with it", but at the moment I'm very much
> interested if there are any general issues we should look out for.
>
> The questions we are asking us now are:
>
> 1) Intel or AMD (or alternate Platform)
> Are we better of with Xeons or Opterons? Should we consider the IBM
> OpenPower platform?
>
> 2) CPUs vs cache
> Would you rather have more CPUs or more cache? Eg: 4x Xeon 1MB vs 2x
> Xeon 8MB
>
> 3) CPUs vs Memory
> Would you rather have 4x CPUs and 8GB of memory, or 2x CPUs with
> 16GB of
> memory?
>
> Thanks in advance for all your replies!
>
> Best Regards,
> Christian Kastner
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc Cousin 2005-09-07 12:02:02 Re: insert performance for win32
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2005-09-07 03:07:04 Re: Poor performance of delete by primary key