Subject: Re: More cores or higer frequency ?
To: Jarek <jarek@poczta.srv.pl>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
References: <1495564174.6168.10.camel@sem-jarek-01.prv>
 <CAEfWYyw6d72mpLiaaOHbAjhNsGR+_pM3saTY8EWw5Y+3szwKWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1495570454.6168.44.camel@sem-jarek-01.prv>
From: "Sven R. Kunze" <srkunze@mail.de>
Message-ID: <1c5c89f2-9b3a-69f2-af2a-c905affc1944@mail.de>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 22:49:58 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1495570454.6168.44.camel@sem-jarek-01.prv>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

On 23.05.2017 22:14, Jarek wrote:
> I have pool of clients (~30) inserting to database about 50 records per
> second (in total from all clients) and small numer (<10) clients
> querying database for those records once per 10s.
> Other queries are rare and irregular.
> The biggest table has ~ 100mln records (older records are purged
> nightly). Database size is ~13GB.
> I near future I'm expecting ~150 clients and 250 inserts per second and
> more clients querying database.
> Server is handling also apache with simple web application written in
> python.
> For the same price, I can get 8C/3.2GHz or 14C/2.6GHz. Which one will be
> better ?
>
>
>

Hi Jarek,

in case of your increasing parallel requirements (more clients, more 
inserts), I would tend to the 14C setup. However, as usual take this 
with a grain of salt. My word is not a guarantee for success in this case.

Best would be to setup a test scenario where you can simulate with both 
hardware setups.

Regards,
Sven


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance