Re: Freebsd vs linux and hardware question

There are two docs here on hardware optimization, one by Bruce Momjian:
http://techdocs.postgresql.org/

Richard Seiersen
rich67dev(at)hotmail(dot)com

>From: Dror Matalon <dror(at)zapatec(dot)com>
>To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
>CC: sfpug(at)postgresql(dot)org
>Subject: Re: [sfpug] Freebsd vs linux and hardware question
>Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 15:48:35 -0700
>
>On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 03:10:48PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Dror,
> >
> > Howdy! Long time, no hear.
>
>Busy, busy as usal :-).
>
> >
> > > Any opinions on the advantages/disadvantages of running postgres on
> > > Linux vs running it on freebsd?
> >
> > Several prominent members of the PostgreSQL community claim better
>performance
> > on BSD due to BSD's better I/O stack, plus the history of Ingres
>filesystem
> > optimization on BSD. However, nobody has published figures.
>
>That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure if recent improvements in linux
>IO hasn't caused it to catch up. I know that Linux networking has
>improved a lot in the last couple of years, but I wasn't sure if it and
>the IO code has caught up with BSD.
>
> >
> > > Also, under either OS would a dual processor machine run faster than a
> > > single processor one. For the most part, I know that databases are IO
> > > bound rather than CPU, bound so more memory and more and faster disks
> > > are a main issue. Still, it seems like being able to use multiple cpus
> > > could improve performance.
> >
> > Not sure about BSD, but on Linux I know that Postgres will happily use
>up to 4
> > CPUs for simultaneos seperate requests. This doesn't help with modular
>large
> > queries/procedures, but does help a lot for concurrent users.
>
>OK.
>
> > >
> > > Finally, is SCSI still such a big improvement over modern IDE drives?
> >
> > Yes. ;-)
> >
> > But hey, why are you asking this stuff? Don't you run Zapatec's stuff
>off a
> > huge SAN?
>
>It's not so Huge, out netapp is less than 200 Megs. But the real issue
>is that it works really well for small data sets but not for big ones.
>
>We're working on a new application that will handle millions of rows.
>Currently the table size is half a gig and growing.
>
>On this type of application the netapp is slower than local disks. So
>we're thinking of setting up a new machine with plenty of power. I'm
>trying to figure out what the right configuration would be both in terms
>of the hardware and the OS.
>
>Any pointers to recommended hardware configurations?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dror
>
>
> >
> > --
> > -Josh Berkus
> > Aglio Database Solutions
> > San Francisco
> >
>
>--
>Dror Matalon, President
>Zapatec Inc
>1700 MLK Way
>Berkeley, CA 94709
>http://www.zapatec.com

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus