Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:22:02 -0500
From: Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>
To: Maila Fatticcioni <mfatticcioni@mbigroup.it>,
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: DRBD and Postgres: how to improve the perfomance?
Message-ID: <20070911212201.GD38801@decibel.org>
References: <46E11BE4.6060500@mbigroup.it>
 <1189191616.4281.1.camel@ebony.site>
	<46E6AA8C.8030504@mbigroup.it> <20070911145724.GB2620@uio.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KESzhc2vHQHWYDlA"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070911145724.GB2620@uio.no>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)


--KESzhc2vHQHWYDlA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 04:57:24PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 04:47:40PM +0200, Maila Fatticcioni wrote:
> > The servers are cross connected with a common 100 Mbit/sec Ethernet so I
> > think they have a bandwidth around 80 Mbit/sec (even if I haven't yet
> > done any test on it). A rate of 70Mb seems reasonable to me.
>=20
> Umm, seriously? Unless that was a typo, you should consider very seriousl=
y to
> go to gigabit; it's cheap these days, and should provide you with a very
> decent speed boost if the network bandwidth is the bottleneck.

Actually, in this case, I suspect that latency will be far more critical
than overall bandwidth. I don't know if it's inherent to Gig-E, but my
limited experience has been that Gig-E has higher latency than 100mb.
--=20
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby                        decibel@decibel.org
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)

--KESzhc2vHQHWYDlA
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFG5wb5dO30qud8SkgRAutVAKCMaMXLphqscoqBnuDAP59naWQNxgCeMBWk
Vw05+ozjqDgNS2zgAMtCNlo=
=80Jp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--KESzhc2vHQHWYDlA--