Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [ADMIN] Benchmarking postgres on Solaris/Linux

From: matt(at)ymogen(dot)net
To: "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Benchmarking postgres on Solaris/Linux
Date: 2004-03-23 23:35:47
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
> Indeed, if our Suns actually diabled the broken hardware when they
> died, fell over, and rebooted themselves, I'd certainly praise them
> to heaven.  But I have to say that the really very good reporting of
> failing memory has saved me some headaches.

Ha!  Yes, it would seem the obvious thing to do - but as you say, at least
you get told what borked and may even be able to remove it without
stopping the machine.  Sometimes.  Or at least you get a nice lunch from
your Sun reseller.

> I should say, also, that my initial experience of AIX has been
> extremely good.  I can't comment on the fun it might involve in the
> long haul, of course.

The current crop of power4+ boxen is reputed to even be able to recover
from a failed CPU without a restart.  Not *always* one imagines, but
usefully often enough for the banking mob to get sweaty over the feature. 
More importantly though, IBM seems committed to supporting all this
goodness under Linux too  (though not BSD I fear - sorry Bruce)

Now if these vendors could somehow eliminate downtime due to human error
we'd be talking *serious* reliablity.


In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Adam RuthDate: 2004-03-24 03:31:46
Subject: Re: Databases Vs. Schemas
Previous:From: Subbiah, StalinDate: 2004-03-23 23:18:20
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Benchmarking postgres on Solaris/Linux

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group