DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=subject:from:reply-to:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding;
	b=Ho+236l6DkLuRDh2/9/khK0hm1iPVGXALkDExY4iyaYLHGsbxll+EIfe+Sj0kjnLPPZ2iZp+FxsvtcdmrOPGH1t2xqWbpbucz6ePOBmscbUX28X3SUxcxsskjoMKiVr5IvgZV5llIYA6Acft0JpNpRPiSLUffh+5SkXXdJzoyAU=
Subject: Re: Quad Xeon or Quad Opteron?
From: Adam Tauno Williams <adamtaunowilliams@gmail.com>
Reply-To: adamtaunowilliams@gmail.com
To: pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <4836ABD1.1060904@postnewspapers.com.au>
References: <48369F59.60902@wp.pl>  <4836ABD1.1060904@postnewspapers.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 08:21:57 -0400
Message-Id: <1211545317.4704.2.camel@WM_ADAM1.morrison.iserv.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Also, based on what I've seen on this list rather than personal
> experience, you might want to give more thought to your storage than to
> CPU power. The usual thrust of advice seems to be: Get a fast, battery
> backed RAID controller. "Fast" does not mean "fast sequential I/O in
> ideal conditions so marketing can print a big number on the box"; you
> need to consider random I/O too. Get lots of fast disks. Get enough RAM
> to ensure that your indexes fit in RAM if possible.
> Note, however, that I have no direct experience with big Pg databases;
> I'm just trying to provide you with a guide of what information to
> provide and what to think about so you can get better answers here from
> people who actually have a clue.

Yep,  we've had PostreSQL databases for a long time.  The various
current generation processors, IMO, have no substantive difference in
practice;  at least not relative to the bang-for-the-buck or more RAM
and good I/O.