pg.ddx.io pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedPostgres and SUN
9+ messages / 4 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-01 09:25 Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Bräutigam @ 2008-04-01 09:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Hey,
I am very new in this mailing list and also very new in working with Postgres.
My questions is, is there a recommendation from Postgres about which SUN Machine you should choose when you have a huge Postgres Database.
Cheers thomas
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-01 10:04 Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@it-management.at>
parent: Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Michael Monnerie @ 2008-04-01 10:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
On Dienstag, 1. April 2008 Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
> My questions is, is there a recommendation from Postgres about which
> SUN Machine you should choose when you have a huge Postgres Database
This is like you ask "I fly a lot, which airplane should I choose?".
Please provide exact information. What is "huge", which Sun's do you
look at. How many transactions per second do you need, how many users,
what kind of db, ....
Still, even then I don't know if anybody could really help you really. I
couldn't, as we don't use any Sun's. :-(
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0676/846 914 666 .network.your.ideas.
// PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38 500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4
// Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 1C1209B4
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 193B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-01 12:54 Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@it-management.at>
parent: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@it-management.at>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Michael Monnerie @ 2008-04-01 12:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
First, please keep the discussion on the mailinglist.
On Dienstag, 1. April 2008 Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
> What is "huge"
> The DB Size is between 500 GB and 2 Terra, mostly over 1 Terra.
Over 1 Tera is kinda huge, I'd say :-)
> I looked at the Fire V490
> One to three User are necessary
> I don't know the exact transacations per second, but the most of the
> jobs the database have to do is that we have a high amount of
> inserations and deletions in the database.
> What do you mean with what kind of Database?
If it's an offline like application where you just need to store lots of
information to make some statistics, it wouldn't matter too much if a
query takes 50 minutes or 60 minutes. If it's like a broker online
system a single query should optimally take <1ms ;-)
Do you have that db already, and on which hardware. Does it perform
well? The best is to have a "normal" machine filled with the data to
see if you need more. It can be surprising how many transactions/s a
simple AMD dual core with 8GB RAM and a cheap SATA RAID with 16x10krpm
WD Raptor disks can handle. Probably you can buy such a test machine,
shouldn't cost more than 3000€, and it's good for a first idea how much
you need. And if it's too slow, you'll have an estimation of how much
more power you need. This can save a *lot* of money, as Sun's aren't
the cheapest iron around, so a smaller model probably saves a lot more
money than this test machine.
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0676/846 914 666 .network.your.ideas.
// PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38 500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4
// Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 1C1209B4
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 193B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-01 14:25 Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
parent: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@it-management.at>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Bräutigam @ 2008-04-01 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Hi Zmi,
Okay thanks for that advice. Sorry its my first day on a mailing list.
But do Postgres have a special recommendation which SUN equipment runs perfect with a Postgres Database?
A time for a query over 30 seconds I would say is to long. So the machine should be fast enough to handle it in 10-20 Seconds. Price for the Machine doesn’t matter at all. The machine should just fit and can handle this kinda huge database.
Cheers Thomas
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Monnerie [mailto:michael.monnerie@it-management.at]
Sent: Dienstag, 1. April 2008 14:54
To: Thomas Bräutigam
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Postgres and SUN
First, please keep the discussion on the mailinglist.
On Dienstag, 1. April 2008 Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
> What is "huge"
> The DB Size is between 500 GB and 2 Terra, mostly over 1 Terra.
Over 1 Tera is kinda huge, I'd say :-)
> I looked at the Fire V490
> One to three User are necessary
> I don't know the exact transacations per second, but the most of the
> jobs the database have to do is that we have a high amount of
> inserations and deletions in the database.
> What do you mean with what kind of Database?
If it's an offline like application where you just need to store lots of information to make some statistics, it wouldn't matter too much if a query takes 50 minutes or 60 minutes. If it's like a broker online system a single query should optimally take <1ms ;-)
Do you have that db already, and on which hardware. Does it perform well? The best is to have a "normal" machine filled with the data to see if you need more. It can be surprising how many transactions/s a simple AMD dual core with 8GB RAM and a cheap SATA RAID with 16x10krpm WD Raptor disks can handle. Probably you can buy such a test machine, shouldn't cost more than 3000€, and it's good for a first idea how much you need. And if it's too slow, you'll have an estimation of how much more power you need. This can save a *lot* of money, as Sun's aren't the cheapest iron around, so a smaller model probably saves a lot more money than this test machine.
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0676/846 914 666 .network.your.ideas.
// PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38 500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4
// Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 1C1209B4
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-01 18:14 Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@it-management.at>
parent: Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Michael Monnerie @ 2008-04-01 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
On Dienstag, 1. April 2008 Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
> Okay thanks for that advice. Sorry its my first day on a mailing
> list.
No problem.
> But do Postgres have a special recommendation which SUN equipment
> runs perfect with a Postgres Database?
I have nothing to do with postgres (well, I have to admin some servers
running it). Maybe other can give hints. Or where you can get paid
support/information.
> A time for a query over 30 seconds I would say is to long. So the
> machine should be fast enough to handle it in 10-20 Seconds. Price
> for the Machine doesn’t matter at all. The machine should just fit
> and can handle this kinda huge database.
Still, we have no idea what kind of data is in there, what the queries
would look like etc.
I'd say any Sun equipment will be running fine, as it's fine hardware.
For the sizing of that machine, I can only suggest running your
application on a test server. I'm far from being a specialist for
postgresql, but maybe other can help here too.
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0676/846 914 666 .network.your.ideas.
// PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38 500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4
// Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 1C1209B4
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 193B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-03 17:27 Robert Lor <Robert.Lor@Sun.COM>
parent: Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Robert Lor @ 2008-04-03 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org, "Jignesh K. Shah" <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
Thomas,
Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
> Hi Zmi,
>
> Okay thanks for that advice. Sorry its my first day on a mailing list.
>
> But do Postgres have a special recommendation which SUN equipment runs perfect with a Postgres Database?
>
> A time for a query over 30 seconds I would say is to long. So the machine should be fast enough to handle it in 10-20 Seconds. Price for the Machine doesn’t matter at all. The machine should just fit and can handle this kinda huge database.
>
Sun has published a benchmark on the Sun Fire T2000 Server and the
results are published here
http://www.spec.org/jAppServer2004/results/res2007q3/jAppServer2004-20070703-00073.html
Jignesh has also done tests on the following AMD and Intel systems, and
I believe the results were quite good.
http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/x4200/
http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4450/
Regards,
-Robert
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-04 07:47 Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
parent: Robert Lor <Robert.Lor@Sun.COM>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Bräutigam @ 2008-04-04 07:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert.Lor@Sun.COM; +Cc: pgsql-admin; Jignesh K. Shah <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
Hi Robert
What do you think about the SUN T5120 or T5220 with a Postgres Database?
Cheers Thomas
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert.Lor@Sun.COM [mailto:Robert.Lor@Sun.COM]
Sent: Donnerstag, 3. April 2008 19:28
To: Thomas Bräutigam
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Jignesh K. Shah
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Postgres and SUN
Thomas,
Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
> Hi Zmi,
>
> Okay thanks for that advice. Sorry its my first day on a mailing list.
>
> But do Postgres have a special recommendation which SUN equipment runs perfect with a Postgres Database?
>
> A time for a query over 30 seconds I would say is to long. So the machine should be fast enough to handle it in 10-20 Seconds. Price for the Machine doesn't matter at all. The machine should just fit and can handle this kinda huge database.
>
Sun has published a benchmark on the Sun Fire T2000 Server and the results are published here http://www.spec.org/jAppServer2004/results/res2007q3/jAppServer2004-20070703-00073.html
Jignesh has also done tests on the following AMD and Intel systems, and I believe the results were quite good.
http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/x4200/
http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4450/
Regards,
-Robert
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-04 13:14 Jignesh K. Shah <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
parent: Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jignesh K. Shah @ 2008-04-04 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>; +Cc: Robert.Lor@Sun.COM; pgsql-admin
T5120 and T5220 have 8 cores with 8 threads each resulting in 64
threads. Best way to view this is 64-vcpu server in 1U or 2U size.
Experience with PostgreSQL is varied on such boxes:
* Setup on such boxes does not use lot of cpus as most utilities only
use 1 vcpu at a time and hence can take a while to setup
* However after that if you run OLTP or Web 2.0 type queries (small
transactions with multiple users) or small reads and sometimes update
from thousands of user then this box is great and throughput handled is
quite remarkable.
* But if you use it for DSS or data warehousing or Long running query
with a small number of users, again since each query will use only 1
vcpu the resulting query could take a longer time on this 1.2 to 1.4Ghz
cores.
I am setting the expectations right. These boxes are great for OLTP,
scalability is also great though it depends on the workload. Eventually
I have seen that PostgreSQL saturates little before the box saturates
but by then you probably end up being one of the big OLTP customers
using Postgres handling hundreds to thousands of users:-)
-Jignesh
Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
> Hi Robert
>
> What do you think about the SUN T5120 or T5220 with a Postgres Database?
>
> Cheers Thomas
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert.Lor@Sun.COM [mailto:Robert.Lor@Sun.COM]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 3. April 2008 19:28
> To: Thomas Bräutigam
> Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Jignesh K. Shah
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Postgres and SUN
>
> Thomas,
>
> Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
>
>> Hi Zmi,
>>
>> Okay thanks for that advice. Sorry its my first day on a mailing list.
>>
>> But do Postgres have a special recommendation which SUN equipment runs perfect with a Postgres Database?
>>
>> A time for a query over 30 seconds I would say is to long. So the machine should be fast enough to handle it in 10-20 Seconds. Price for the Machine doesn't matter at all. The machine should just fit and can handle this kinda huge database.
>>
>>
> Sun has published a benchmark on the Sun Fire T2000 Server and the results are published here http://www.spec.org/jAppServer2004/results/res2007q3/jAppServer2004-20070703-00073.html
>
> Jignesh has also done tests on the following AMD and Intel systems, and I believe the results were quite good.
>
> http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/x4200/
> http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4450/
>
>
> Regards,
> -Robert
>
>
>
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Postgres and SUN
@ 2008-04-07 06:27 Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
parent: Jignesh K. Shah <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Bräutigam @ 2008-04-07 06:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jignesh K. Shah <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>; +Cc: Robert.Lor@Sun.COM; pgsql-admin
Hi Jignesh,
Thanks for this information.
Did SUN make any other tests with SUN Machines and Postgres Databases?
Cheers Thomas
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Jignesh K. Shah
Sent: Freitag, 4. April 2008 15:14
To: Thomas Bräutigam
Cc: Robert.Lor@Sun.COM; pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Postgres and SUN
T5120 and T5220 have 8 cores with 8 threads each resulting in 64 threads. Best way to view this is 64-vcpu server in 1U or 2U size.
Experience with PostgreSQL is varied on such boxes:
* Setup on such boxes does not use lot of cpus as most utilities only use 1 vcpu at a time and hence can take a while to setup
* However after that if you run OLTP or Web 2.0 type queries (small transactions with multiple users) or small reads and sometimes update from thousands of user then this box is great and throughput handled is quite remarkable.
* But if you use it for DSS or data warehousing or Long running query with a small number of users, again since each query will use only 1 vcpu the resulting query could take a longer time on this 1.2 to 1.4Ghz cores.
I am setting the expectations right. These boxes are great for OLTP, scalability is also great though it depends on the workload. Eventually I have seen that PostgreSQL saturates little before the box saturates but by then you probably end up being one of the big OLTP customers using Postgres handling hundreds to thousands of users:-)
-Jignesh
Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
> Hi Robert
>
> What do you think about the SUN T5120 or T5220 with a Postgres Database?
>
> Cheers Thomas
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert.Lor@Sun.COM [mailto:Robert.Lor@Sun.COM]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 3. April 2008 19:28
> To: Thomas Bräutigam
> Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Jignesh K. Shah
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Postgres and SUN
>
> Thomas,
>
> Thomas Bräutigam wrote:
>
>> Hi Zmi,
>>
>> Okay thanks for that advice. Sorry its my first day on a mailing list.
>>
>> But do Postgres have a special recommendation which SUN equipment runs perfect with a Postgres Database?
>>
>> A time for a query over 30 seconds I would say is to long. So the machine should be fast enough to handle it in 10-20 Seconds. Price for the Machine doesn't matter at all. The machine should just fit and can handle this kinda huge database.
>>
>>
> Sun has published a benchmark on the Sun Fire T2000 Server and the
> results are published here
> http://www.spec.org/jAppServer2004/results/res2007q3/jAppServer2004-20
> 070703-00073.html
>
> Jignesh has also done tests on the following AMD and Intel systems, and I believe the results were quite good.
>
> http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/x4200/
> http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4450/
>
>
> Regards,
> -Robert
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-04-07 06:27 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-04-01 09:25 Postgres and SUN Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
2008-04-01 10:04 ` Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@it-management.at>
2008-04-01 12:54 ` Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@it-management.at>
2008-04-01 14:25 ` Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
2008-04-01 18:14 ` Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@it-management.at>
2008-04-03 17:27 ` Robert Lor <Robert.Lor@Sun.COM>
2008-04-04 07:47 ` Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
2008-04-04 13:14 ` Jignesh K. Shah <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
2008-04-07 06:27 ` Thomas Bräutigam <thomas.braeutigam@nexustelecom.com>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox