Re: 1 TB of memory

From: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres(at)mathom(dot)us>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 1 TB of memory
Date: 2006-03-17 12:31:23
Message-ID: 20060317123121.GO15140@mathom.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 10:44:25PM -0800, Luke Lonergan wrote:
>You'd be better off with 4 x $10K servers that do 800MB/s from disk each and
>a Bizgres MPP - then you'd do 3.2GB/s (faster than the SSD) at a price 1/10
>of the SSD, and you'd have 24TB of RAID5 disk under you.

Except, of course, that your solution doesn't have a seek time of zero.
That approach is great for applications that are limited by their
sequential scan speed, not so good for applications with random access.
At 3.2 GB/s it would still take over 5 minutes to seqscan a TB, so you'd
probably want some indices--and you're not going to be getting 800MB/s
per system doing random index scans from rotating disk (but you might
with SSD). Try not to beat your product drum quite so loud...

Mike Stone

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PFC 2006-03-17 13:35:15 Re: Background writer configuration
Previous Message Evgeny Gridasov 2006-03-17 12:24:48 Re: Background writer configuration