| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Matthew Nuzum" <cobalt(at)bearfruit(dot)org>, "'Pgsql-Performance'" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: choosing the right platform |
| Date: | 2003-04-09 18:03:48 |
| Message-ID: | 200304091103.48151.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Matthew,
> I read through the entire archive at
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/ and didn't see much talk
> on the subject. It only goes back 8 months though, so I don't know if there
> is another archive that is more comprehensive...
Really? There was a long-running Mac OS X vs. Solaris thread that touched on
most major platforms, about 2-3 months ago.
> I don't suspect that individual tables will be 2GB, but that the size of all
> tables combined will be. If there is a limitation on the largest chunk of
> RAM allocated to a program, will I have problems?
No. Since PostgreSQL is a multi-process architecture, not a multi-threaded,
you only need enough RAM per process to load the current largest query.
Plus, in my experience, Disk I/O issues are vastly more important than RAM in
database performance. You're better off spending money on really fast disks
in Linux RAID or really good hardware RAID 1+0 ....
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2003-04-09 23:45:01 | Re: choosing the right platform |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-04-09 17:55:56 | Re: choosing the right platform |