| From: | Mike Rylander <mrylander(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Anjan Dave <adave(at)vantage(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?) |
| Date: | 2005-04-20 18:11:47 |
| Message-ID: | b918cf3d050420111114bc840a@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 4/20/05, Anjan Dave <adave(at)vantage(dot)com> wrote:
> In terms of vendor specific models -
>
> Does anyone have any good/bad experiences/recommendations for a 4-way
> Opteron from Sun (v40z, 6 internal drives) or HP (DL585 5 internal
> drives) models?
We are going with the 90nm HPs for production. They "feel" like
beefier boxes than the Suns, but the Suns cost a LOT less, IIRC.
We're only using the internal drives for the OS. PG gets access to a
fibre-channel array, HP StorageWorks 3000. I _can't wait_ to get this
in.
Our dev box is a 130nm DL585 with 16G of RAM and an HP SCSI array, and
I have absolutely zero complaints. :)
--
Mike Rylander
mrylander(at)gmail(dot)com
GPLS -- PINES Development
Database Developer
http://open-ils.org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joel Fradkin | 2005-04-20 18:15:29 | Re: Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?) |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2005-04-20 18:01:09 | Re: Opteron vs Xeon (Was: What to do with 6 disks?) |