X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D4F39DC81C for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:34:59 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 45820-03 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:34:58 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (unknown [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF7CA9DC812 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:34:55 -0400 (AST) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id DFFC23982A; Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:34:56 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:34:56 -0600 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: Juan Casero Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Ultrasparc T1 Message-ID: <20051220193456.GI28771@pervasive.com> References: <200512181135.15202.caseroj@comcast.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200512181135.15202.caseroj@comcast.net> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.039 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039] X-Spam-Score: 0.039 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/507 X-Sequence-Number: 16328 On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 11:35:15AM -0500, Juan Casero wrote: > Can anyone tell me how well PostgreSQL 8.x performs on the new Sun Ultrasparc > T1 processor and architecture on Solaris 10? I have a custom built retail > sales reporting that I developed using PostgreSQL 7.48 and PHP on a Fedora People have seen some pretty big gains going from 7.4 to 8.1. I recently migrated http://stats.distributed.net and the daily processing (basically OLAP) times were cut in half. As someone else mentioned, IO is probably going to be your biggest consideration, unless you have a lot of queries running at once. Probably your best bang for the buck will be from an Opteron-based server with a good number of internal drives. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461