> Do you mean 3x the performance for the NAS or 3x the performance for the
> actual server. 3x the performance for 25% extra cost sounds quite
> impressive, though I suspect that's not really the case. You have of
> course picqued my interest, and we haven't placed the order yet, so let me
> look into the IBMs and Penguins.
Server. For the NAS, it'll be more like 3x to 5x the cost.
> > As a comparison: I have one dot-com client running on Dell 2650s, and
> > they have a 3-machine Slony cluster that just keeps up with their load.
> > I've another client with a website about twice as busy, and they run
> > everything off of a single quad-Opteron home build.
> And their queries are all comparable?
Well, the Dell client has a slightly higher Write/Read ratio of activity. But
very similar, yes.
Aglio Database Solutions
In response to
sfpug by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2005-04-24 00:25:03|
|Subject: ACM paper?|
|Previous:||From: Jeff Frost||Date: 2005-04-19 16:49:27|
|Subject: Re: Warm standby architecture opinions|