Re: Question on pgbench output

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Kerr <dmk(at)mr-paradox(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Question on pgbench output
Date: 2009-04-03 22:30:38
Message-ID: 24448.1238797838@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

David Kerr <dmk(at)mr-paradox(dot)net> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 04:43:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> - How much more "real" is the target hardware than what you have?
> - You appear to need about a factor of 10 better disk throughput than
> - you have, and that's not going to be too cheap.

> The hardware i'm using is a 5 or 6 year old POS IBM Blade. we haven't
> specced the new hardware yet but I would say that it will be sigificantly
> better.

The point I was trying to make is that it's the disk subsystem, not
the CPU, that is going to make or break you.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-04-03 22:52:26 Re: Question on pgbench output
Previous Message Greg Smith 2009-04-03 21:51:50 Re: Question on pgbench output