Re: Performance large tables.

Hello,

may I ask you some questions.

What is the performance difference between U320 15kRPM and U320 10kRPM ?
Does your RAID crontoller has some memory (e.g. 128 MB or 256 MB )
and something like memory backup write cache (like HP DL 380 server) ?
Do you use Intel or Opteron cpus ?

regards,

-Franz

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Vivek Khera [mailto:vivek(at)khera(dot)org]
Gesendet: Montag, 12. Dezember 2005 23:15
An: PG-General General
Betreff: Re: [GENERAL] Performance large tables.

On Dec 10, 2005, at 6:37 PM, Benjamin Arai wrote:

> For the most part the updates are simple one liners. I currently
> commit in large batch to increase performance but it still takes a
> while as stated above. From evaluating the computers performance
> during an update, the system is thrashing both memory and disk. I
> am currently using Postgresql 8.0.3.

Then buy faster disks. My current favorite is to use U320 15kRPM
disks using a dual-chanel RAID controller with 1/2 the disks on one
channel and 1/2 on the other and mirroring them across channels, then
striping down the mirrors (ie, RAID10).

I use no fewer than 6 disks (RAID 10) for data and 2 for pg_log in a
RAID1.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq