Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:44:48 +0200 From: Palle Girgensohn <girgen@pingpong.net> To: Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: AMD or Intel? Message-ID: <26F41A5DACB2D2CB43A5829E@c-6254e155.1521-1-64736c12.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se> In-Reply-To: <cone.1189727090.40770.77599.5001@35st.simplicato.com> References: <E6C9DBADAE3839B380B736D7@rambutan.pingpong.net> <cone.1189710437.247473.77599.5001@35st.simplicato.com> <1F219879A7E5C565C96109FF@c-2f56e155.1521-1-64736c12.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se> <cone.1189727090.40770.77599.5001@35st.simplicato.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On torsdag, torsdag 13 sep 2007 19.44.50 -0400 Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com> wrote: > Palle Girgensohn writes: > >> Presently ~pgsql/data has a 16 GB footprint. > > If you can put 4GB or better in your machine you should do well. > Specially since you mentioned you are mostly read with relatively small > amount of writes. > >> The growth is rather slow, around a percent per week Sorry, my mistake, more like a percent per day at the moment... We are planning about 16 GB RAM, actually. Maybe it is overkill? > What controller are you getting? > We have a 3ware SATA controller with RAID6 and it performs pretty well. > Based on what you wrote SATA RAID should be enough for your load and > usage pattern. > > Obviously if you can afford SCSI/SAS performance will likely be even > better. However make sure you can get management program for the > controller. At the very least some type of notification if the raid is > degraded. We will probably go for SCSI. HP DL380 with "HP SmartArray", aka ciss.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?26F41A5DACB2D2CB43A5829E>