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

Re: CPUs for new databases

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ivan Voras <ivoras(at)freebsd(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CPUs for new databases
Date: 2010-10-27 07:52:20
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 1:37 AM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Scott Marlowe wrote:
>> There was an earlier thread with
>> Greg and I in it where we posted the memory bandwidth numbers for that
>> machine and it was insane how much data all 48 cores could pump into /
>> out of memory at the same time.
> Yeah, it was insane. Building a economical 'that generation opteron'
> database server has been on my wishlist since that thread, my current
> favorite is the 8-core 6128 opteron, for $275,- at newegg
> Ah might as well drop the whole config on my wishlist as well:
> 2 times that 8 core processor
> Supermicro H8DGU-F motherboard - 16 dimm slots, dual socket, dual Intel
> ethernet and additional ethernet for IPMI.
> 2 times KVR1333D3D4R9SK8/32G memory - 4GB dimms seem to be at the GB/$ sweet
> spot at the moment for DDR3
> 1 time OCZ Vertex 2 Pro 100GB (there was a thread about this sandforce disk
> as well: a SSD with supercap that acts as battery backup)
> maybe another one or two spindled 2.5" drives for archive/backup.
> Supermicro 113TQ-563UB chassis
> At the time I looked this up, I could buy it for just over €3000,-

It's important to remember that often we're talking about a machine
that has to run dozens of concurrent requests when you start needing
this many cores, and consequently, how man spindles (SSD or HD) to
sustain a certain throughput rate.

If you're looking at that many cores make sure you can put enough SSDs
and / or HDs underneath it to keep up.  Just being able to go from 4
to 8 drives can extend the life of a db server by years.  Supermicro
makes some nice 2U enclosures that hold either 8 or 16  2.5" drives.

> PS: I'm in no way involved with either of the manufacturers, nor one of
> their fanboys. I'm just interested, like the OP, what is good
> hardware/config for a PG related server.

Me either really.  Both times I bought db servers were right after AMD
had taken a lead in SMP.  Got a fair number of intel cpu machines in
the farm that work great, but not as database servers.  But I am keen
on the 8 core AMDs to come down.  Those things have crazy good memory
bandwidth and you can actually use all 16 cores in a server.  I've got
a previous intermediate AMD with the old 6 core cpus, and that thing
can't run more than 8 processes before it starts slowing down.

I don't know your projected data usage needs, but if they are at all
on a positive slope, consider the machines with 8 drive bays at least,
even if you only need 2 or 4 drives now.  Those chassis let you extend
the IO of a db server at will to 2 to 4 times it's original setup
pretty easily.

To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.

In response to


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2010-10-27 08:06:51
Subject: Re: CPUs for new databases
Previous:From: Yeb HavingaDate: 2010-10-27 07:37:35
Subject: Re: CPUs for new databases

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